Showing posts with label AlaPromotesPorn. Show all posts
Showing posts with label AlaPromotesPorn. Show all posts

Sunday, March 27, 2022

Library Association Caught Lying; Dooms $3.5M Funding

Florida Governor Opposing Gender Queer
Library associations lie to legislators and the public to cover up school librarians grooming children.  But people are waking up to this.  

For example, the Idaho Library Association lied in defense of continuing to allow school librarians to make graphic pedophilic literature available to school children.  A legislator called out the lies and as a result the Idaho Library Commission lost $3.5M in funding.  People are realizing if you stem the flow of money to groomers, you can indeed act to slow their ability to groom.  

The grooming is so bad that even state governors are acting to stem the harm to children that school librarians trained by American Library Association (ALA) are doing, as illustrated top right.

Lesson learned: research and think carefully about the excuses librarians are using to perpetuate their ability to harm children, then use their words against them to deny them funding for continued grooming.

A report from Idaho provides an illustration of the above: “On Thursday, Rep. Julianne Young (R-Blackfoot) shared an email from the Idaho Libraries Association from March 2.  Young said it contained ‘a number of false and misleading claims about the content and potential effects’ of House Bill 666 – a proposal that would’ve made it a misdemeanor for librarians to lend any material deemed ‘harmful’ to children.” 

Source: “5th Time's a Charm: Idaho Legislature Passes Library Commission Budget,” by James Dawson, Boise State Public Radio News, 26 March 2022.

So, the Idaho Library Association lied and the Idaho legislator called out its “false and misleading claims about the content and potential effects” of an Idaho House bill (Idaho HB 666).  People are waking up, but not the kind of woke ALA wants.  “‘This is conduct that is unprofessional, it is disingenuous, and in my mind, it is unacceptable,’ Young said of the email Thursday.”

And she’s absolutely right.  Other legislators should similarly look at the “conduct that is unprofessional, … disingenuous, and … unacceptable” by their own state library associations and librarians, let alone ALA.

The content for which librarians are acting so unprofessionally?  It’s grooming content so bad Florida Governor DeSantis spoke out specifically against it, displaying images from a book called “Gender Queer: A Memoir” so pedophilic they had to be blacked out in areas and media will not even show them.  The problem is so bad that it’s festered to the point where state governors are now having to act since so many are frozen by the assumption librarians would never harm children.


These are books school librarians are giving to America’s children.  ALA gives them awards (Stonewall Book Award, 2020, Gender Queer) precisely to help librarians spread them further.  They are award winning!  They are protected by ALA’s so-called “Library Bill of Rights” that prevents librarians from making “age” distinctions!  It’s the First Amendment!  “FReadom”!  “We believe that school libraries do not have obscene or pornographic materials and using these terms to describe books, singular words, or small portions of a book is a tactic to undermine the value of books, public education and educators, particularly school libraries and school librarians.”  

Know that ALA trains librarians, “A librarian is not a legal process. There is not a librarian in the county—unless she or he is a lawyer—who is in the position to determine what he or she is looking at is indeed child pornography.”  It’s like they don’t know what a woman is because they are not biologists.  The people need legislators to act in the face of librarians who are the cause of the problem and who target children with “conduct that is unprofessional, … disingenuous, and … unacceptable.”

Just days ago ALA held a librarian conference where librarians were specifically trained to defy parents and legislators. Look how they lie:

“This is not an accident. What we’re seeing today reflects planning,” noted Caldwell-Stone. The “perfect storm” of the last few years (pandemic, political division, social media, and virtual meetings) has led to local and national attempts to exploit divisions and fears. These attempts also raise moral panic about false claims of pornography, critical race theory (CRT), marxism, and more. School and library board candidates are running on book banning platforms.  Politicians and organizers portray libraries as “dens of iniquity” and librarians as worse.

Source: “Censorship Preparedness at #PLA2022,” by Alec Chunn, ALSC Blog, 25 March 2022.

So while the ALA leader decries “attempts to exploit divisions and fears,” she exploits divisions and fears about “book banning” and “dens of iniquity,” all to make more graphic pedophilic literature available to more school children.

Even members of library boards of trustees who don’t toe the ALA’s groomer line are attacked as homophobes and war criminals, talk about “raising moral panic”:


Source: Coeur d’Alene Press, Friday, 18 March 2022

So, legislators, since librarians will not voluntarily stop giving children graphic pedophilic literature—quite the opposite, it’s getting worse—you can stop funding them and their groomer activities, as Rep. Julianne Young and fellow legislators have just successfully done.  Don’t give money to people grooming your children, even if they serve a once venerable public role.  Carefully research and examine the excuses librarians use to perpetuate their harm to children, then use their own words to deny them funding for continued grooming.
Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Location: Boise, ID, USA

Thursday, August 23, 2018

EBSCO Advertises 'P-rn and S-x Toys' to K-12 School Kids

EBSCO advertises porn and sex toys to school children, reports Concerned Citizens for School Databases, "p*rn and 's*x toys' are ADVERTISED TO KIDS thru #EBSCO K-12 DATABASES!":

"Easy access to porn on school devices creates a culture of sexual harassment #BackToSchool https://bit.ly/2Plcmlh  https://endsexualexploitation.org/?p=22658  via @ncose":

"Learn the truth about porn in schools #BackToSchool":

Here's guidance from Safe Schools, Safe Libraries, brought to you by the National Center on Sexual Exploitation (NCOSE), including detailed examples of what EBSCO serves to children:

Send this packet of information to your local Parent Teacher Association:
Lest we think school librarians are not directly involved in ensuring school children remain exposed to inappropriate material provided by EBSCO and similar school database companies, I am reporting that the American Library Association is actively working to silence parental opposition to the porn industry indoctrination by claiming, like it does with Me Too, Times Up sexual harassment it calls "dubious," that the problem doesn't exist—it's an "unsupported belief."

None other than the so-called "Freedom to Read Foundation," a part of the American Library Association, is proud to report that its "trustees and liaisons" strategized about "a new movement calling for censorship or filtering of research databases, arising from an unsupported belief that the databases allow children to access pornography...."
....


Lastly, here are related tweets and a video from a number of sources:





—
URL of this page: 
safelibraries.blogspot.com/2018/08/ebsco.html

On Twitter: 
@ALALibrary @CCSDConvo @FTRF @EBSCO @NCOSE #BackToSchool

Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Location: Chicago, IL, USA

Saturday, January 21, 2017

Brave Librarian Speaks Out as ALA Facilitates CHILD Porn

Judith Krug defending child pornography in public libraries.
Former Illinois ACLU board member Judith Krug became American Library Association's greatest leader.  In the late Sixties, she personally set up the rules librarians nationwide follow to this day to the detriment of many communities.  One brave/anonymous librarian speaks out about her legacy of destruction, literally; his/her email is published for the first time anywhere below.

One of those rules from Judith Krug was that librarians are not to take action against child pornography viewers in public libraries:
"A librarian is not a legal process," Krug said. "There is not librarian in the country -- unless she or he is a lawyer -- who is in the position to determine what he or she is looking at is indeed child pornography."   
Source: "Libraries vs. Police in a Suit Sparked by Porn; Kent Case Centers on People's Rights and Protections," by Jeffrey M. Barker, Seattle Post-Intelligencer Reporter, 12 August 2002.
That statement of hers is an example of policy guidance she gave to public libraries nationwide:
Libraries and librarians are not in a position to make those decisions for library users or for citizens generally.  Only courts have constitutional authority to determine, in accordance with due process, what materials are obscenity, child pornography, or “harmful to minors.”
....
As for obscenity and child pornography, prosecutors and police have adequate tools to enforce criminal laws.  Libraries are not a component of law enforcement efforts naturally directed toward the source, i.e., the publishers, of such material. 
Source: "Guidelines and Considerations for Developing a Public Library Internet Use Policy," by Office for Intellectual Freedom, American Library Association, as archived 7 March 2016.
ALA "guidelines" for libraries to ignore child pornography.
Her policy to ignore child pornography in public libraries was followed by libraries:
Accordingly, even if the library employs a computer technician who could demonstrate that the patron was viewing child pornography on the computer, this is not a reportable criminal offense, the library’s computer technician is not under any statutory reporting obligation, and the Library’s Records Confidentiality Act may be violated if such a report is made. 
Source: "A Patron is Viewing What Appears to be Child Pornography On a Library Computer; What Should Be Done?," by Klein, Thorpe & Jenkins, LTD, Library Law, 27 April 2011.
Library removing ghost of Judith Krug as ALA
hides policy advising librarians to ignore child porn viewing.
Library directors even forced their own librarians to cover up child porn viewing:
Even library schools teach this dangerous ALA policy, e.g.:
Buy Shut Up! or
borrow from library.
Finally change has taken place—after decades—and after
  1. over a decade of my own work,
  2. the listing of the American Library Association on the annual Dirty Dozen List by the National Center on Sexual Exploitation, and
  3. the publication of a book by public library child pornography whistleblowers Megan Fox and Kevin DuJan, the latter being my SafeLibraries co-author. 
Finally, the American Library Association removed from its "guidelines" the directive to ignore child pornography.  See:

Four years straight ALA has been on NCOSE's Dirty Dozen List
as a "Top Contributor to Sexual Exploitation."
Not only did ALA remove the directive to ignore child pornography, but it removed the entirety of the "guidelines"!  It basically censored itself!  The "guidelines" are still titled as such, but they now exist as a wholesale copy from another ALA policy that was not so prominently promoted previously.

And to cover up this debacle, ALA claimed the wholesale copying of a preexisting policy was merely an "excerpt," which is another in a long line of flat out lies to cover up its shameful and illegal activities, some of which can be seen in the brave/anonymous librarian letter published at the bottom.  Compare:
To the librarians who mock public library child pornography whistleblowers, we whistleblowers forced ALA to completely remove its publicly visible dangerous policy that facilitated child pornography in public libraries nationwide.

That said, the ALA policy still suffers from serious flaws.  For example, it still decries "censorship" although the US Supreme Court ruled blocking Internet porn in public libraries does not violate the First Amendment.

And in a hilarious instance of ridiculous diktat, it states that the safety of children using Internet computers in colleges and universities can only be assured by their own parents.  No college student ever brings his mommy into the college library to protect him from Internet porn.  Yet here's ALA providing guidance making that a requirement:
Academic libraries usually do not have the same censorship problems as public and school libraries. Most users of academic libraries are students (over 18 years old) and faculty. As a result, users in academic libraries can freely access Internet resources. It is important that parents are aware that their children can be exposed to information that may not be age-appropriate when their children use academic libraries. Parents need to be mindful that, as in any other public space, children need to have parental supervision.  
Source: "Libraries and the Internet Toolkit," by Office for Intellectual Freedom, American Library Association, 29 May 2007, accessed 17 December 2016.
But ALA has really topped itself in the area of child pornography facilitation in public libraries.  Remember I said ALA changed its policy as a result of child porn whistleblowers? Recall I said it not only changed the policy but removed it completely, replacing it will an older, preexisting policy?  It did, but it wasn't because of the obvious reason.

The obvious reason for ALA to delete its policy facilitating child pornography in public libraries after years of pressure is that it has seen the light and no longer supports its previous policy position created by Judith Krug of the ACLU/ALA almost half a century ago.

But that is not the reason ALA removed its child porn facilitation policy.

ALA removed its child pornography facilitation policy to take it out of the public's view.  It removed the policy so child porn whistleblowers could no longer point a finger at evidence of the policy.  ALA has essentially gone dark on its child porn facilitation policies.  It fully intends to continue to facilitate child porn in public libraries.

There are a number of ways to know ALA is continuing to facilitate child porn in libraries:
  1. It removed from public view its long standing policy to facilitate child pornography in public libraries, but only after long and determined effort by child porn whistleblowers, including the publication of a 600+ page book entitled, "Shut Up! The Bizarre War that One Public Library Waged Against the First Amendment."
  2. It did this silently.  It did not announce any new policy to report child pornography.  It simply deleted the policy, substituted another one and claimed it was an excerpt.  There was no announcement of any change.  Neither Library Journal nor ALA's own American Libraries ran any stories on the new policy.
  3. When one librarian (Karen Jensen) wrote in School Library Journal about how child porn should be reported in public libraries, she was basically ignored.  No one other than myself paid her any attention or retweeted her or commented on her writing.  She did not win any awards, like the "Intellectual Freedom Award" one library won for protecting child pornography.  It's just forgotten.  She's forgotten.  See: "Plan to Report Child Pornography in Public Libraries."
  4. ALA is keeping in place all other policies and practices that help facilitate child porn in libraries, as I've listed above.  If it were truly interested in stamping out child pornography facilitation in public libraries, it would not only change its policy but also make other changes to effectuate the new policy.  It simply has not done or said anything.  Silence.
  5. ALA whips up opposition to me and any child porn whistleblowers.  We are repeatedly attacked, even by the leader of ALA's "Office for Intellectual Freedom" who blocks me on Twitter, for example.  So much for intellectual freedom.  Libraries where I expose child porn facilitation also block me on Twitter.  ALA librarians are told to block me, and over a hundred do.  Now if you have a sincere change of heart about facilitating child porn in public libraries, you do not attack and silence the child porn whistleblowers, yet here is Jamie LaRue, leader of ALA's supposed intellectual freedom office, doing just that:
And here's a graphic in case he hides/deletes that evidence as well:


  1. ALA actively trains librarians to thwart child pornography whistleblowers.  Evidence of this training was obtained by FOIA requests, some of which can be viewed here: Hatefest, and some of which can be seen in the brave/anonymous librarian letter published for the first time below.  The name "Hatefest" comes from my cowriter Kevin DuJan who, for reporting child pornography in a library, was repeatedly attacked for being gay, including at the training provided byALA where his being gay was used to attack Megan Fox who is another child porn whistleblower.  More FOIA information could have been obtained but ALA ordered librarians to violate their state records retention laws and state open government laws to instead destroy evidence of the training.  See: "Deny, Delete, Defend; American Library Association Orders Public Librarians To Destroy Public Documents To Preclude Public Disclosure of its 'Exposure'."  But it's too little, too late, and you can see in the FOIA responses ALA ordering librarians to do absolutely anything to "defend" child pornography viewers in public libraries, like destroying records, not recording records in the first place, misleading the media, or suing child porn whistleblowers for up to $500,000 for defamation.  And lo and behold, I was sued, along with Kevin DuJan and Megan Fox, for defamation.  See: "Bittman v Fox: SafeLibraries Dismissed Second Time."  So as you read through these FOIA responses, remember librarians were being trained that the child porn whistleblowers were self-interested evil out of town authors and prudes who must be stopped at all costs: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/0ByZ7htC3sJifdWpYSWk0OFAwOG8?usp=sharing
And there is yet more evidence of how ALA facilitates child porn in public libraries.

Below is never before published information.  It is a letter received in response to the FOIA requests mentioned above.

Read about the homophobia ("Blondie kept pointing out that he is gay"), the hate ("you should not be hanging out all day with a gay guy"), the directions to destroy evidence from ALA.  Read how ALA controls what local libraries do to mislead local government, media, and citizens.  Read how he/she was ordered to destroy evidence, and he/she did as he/she was ordered.

Read the fear in this librarian's voice that he/she should dare speak out against the high and mighty ALA, facilitator of child porn.

For more on "Blondie," see: "2014-07-08 = OPPL Spokesperson Commits Disorderly Conduct/Breach of Peace According to Ofc. Schmidt."  I was sued for linking to this so please watch what ALA tried to have censored; "Blondie" is in green:



These are the tactics of people perpetuating a system of child pornography facilitation in public libraries nationwide.  This is what ALA does, by any means possible including homophobia and ordering librarians to defy the law by destroying documents.

And here it is in the words of one very frightened yet brave librarian, published below for the first time anywhere.  "I've never been to a workshop like this where afterwards it was a big thing to collect all the notes and pretend like it never happened."

To the librarians attending ALA's MidWinter meeting, wake up.  You may be joining the "Women's March" in Atlanta today seeking social justice, but you have your own injustice in your own backyard.  Homophobia.  Child pornography facilitation.  Sexual harassment of librarians caused by Internet porn viewers.  And so on.  All caused by ALA's own policies and actions.  It's time to clean it up.  And you can read it in the words of your own brave/anonymous peer, right now, just below. 

It's sad that a brave/anonymous librarian has to speak out about how ALA facilitates child pornography in public libraries nationwide.  It's worse that she can only speak to the child porn whistleblowers themselves because she fears ALA  Will anyone else speak up?.


Note: [Text in square brackets] means slight changes made to protect anonymity and to prevent retaliatory job action.  Paragraph spacing added.  SafeLibraries welcomes and protects anonymous input and is indeed the only source concerned about the Sexual Harassment of Librarians that's caused by unfiltered Internet pornography due to ALA policy and despite the law.

Key: Acorn = the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) that was exposed as a massive voter fraud by James O'Keefe and Hannah Giles of Project Veritas; ALA = American Library Association; FOIA = Freedom of Information Act; ILA = Illinois Library Association; Office for Intellectual Freedom = ALA’s so-called Office for Intellectual Freedom; Orland Park = Orland Park, IL;

People: Blondie = Bridget Bittman, Public Information employee of the Orland Park Public Library; Bob from the ILA = Robert P. Doyle, Executive Director of the Illinois Library Association; Director = Mary Weimar, Library Director of the Orland Park Public Library; Hillary Clinton = Hillary Clinton; Kevin = Kevin DuJan, whistleblower of child pornography at the Orland Park Public Library; Michelle Obama = Michelle Obama; Ms. Fox = Megan Fox, whistleblower of child pornography at the Orland Park Public Library; Sarah Palin = Sarah Palin; the ALA Woman = Deborah Caldwell-Stone of the American Library Association’s Office for Intellectual Freedom; the President = Barack Hussein Obama

To: Megan Fox

Ms. Fox,

 Our [library] received your recent FOIA request related to the crisis workshop held December 17, 2013. I attended this event but have been told not to respond to you so I am doing this [after work] from a new email account. My job would be threatened if it were known I was telling you this so please do not try to ID me.

 My notes from the workshop were taken from me [in the past] when a big brouhaha happened about this. Not sure what it was all about but my boss said [he/she] got a call that you were looking for things related to the workshop and depending on FOIA and so my notes from the workshop were taken at that time and I was told not to ask for them back. They are gone now.

 I was told recently that you had used FOIA to ask for them again and that you will be told that no notes exist but that is not true. They were taken but they did exist.

 What I can remember about the workshop is this. There were five speakers. Two from Orland Park. Two others were women from the ALA and there was a man from the ILA. Not sure on their names. The two Orland employees were one older with brown hair and glasses and one blonde younger woman. Not sure on their names. But the Director was the older woman and I think the younger woman was the Asst. Director. Not sure. The older woman was more measured and careful when she spoke but the younger one got emotional at times.

 You and a friend of yours whose name I don't recall were featured as examples of two people from the tea party who are attacking libraries around the country as part of some plot. The ALA woman said that this is like what happened to Acorn but now the tea party is going after libraries. They really seemed to believe this but [where] I was at few people bought into that.

 The Director said that you and your friend were paid operatives of the tea party and that you came to Orland Park in October looking for something to invent a complaint about. They said you made up a story and lied about seeing someone doing inappropriate things. Then you started filing FOIA requests about the library after that excuse. Blondie said that you were paid by the tea party to do this.

 Then the Director and Blondie went into a big production about what they had been doing to stop you. The Director said that any library encountering the tea party should involve the police because there are good relationships with the police in towns and villages. The Director said that she has a personal friendship with the Orland police chief and that this was "instrumental" in handling you. I remember how she said the word "instrumental" and she said that the police and the village officials were working with the library on preventing you and your friend from getting any traction. The Director also said that the police should scare you away and have you move on with your lives soon. Blondie said that the police are good tools to use against attackers like you because no one wants the police visiting them and the police will side with the library against patrons especially when they are not even from town.

 A big deal was made about how you and your friend do not live in Orland and you are outsiders and paid operatives.

 Then it got more personal and they showed slides from your website and I guess your friend's website. I remember a picture of a big shark and also a picture of bees. There was a picture of your friend with Sarah Palin and another picture of him with Hillary Clinton shown. And there were pictures of you that looked like they were head shots taken for promotional purposes. The Director and Blondie said that the two of you were setting up a scheme for money and that this was all a stunt to either get attention for you or to write a book.

 Blondie said that Orland was focusing only on you and ignoring your friend because he is gay and it gets messy to attack a gay guy. But they have plenty of examples of how to combat a mom who complains. Treat her like Sarah Palin and tell everyone she is dumb and just makes babies was the gist of that. This is when that photo of Sarah Palin and your friend was shown I think. This was a big section of their talk and it went on for a while about how you were painted as a liar and how Blondie looked at everything you said or wrote to find any inconsistencies. The Director said that as soon as an inconsistency was found that the media were alerted to it as proof that you could not be trusted.

 Blondie also said it was necessary to say that you did not have children with you in the library because that further made you a liar. She said that since you had no videos or photos of your kids in the library that it was their word against yours and people automatically believe the library over regular people.

 The ALA later picked up that thread and said it was a useful tool to use because people just believe what a library says and we need to take advantage of that. Who would believe that the library was doing anything wrong?

 The Director and Blondie then talked about how they were documenting everything that you and your friend did and taking it to the police until a charge could be filed at some point. Once you crossed a line they would be able to neutralize you and get an order from a judge keeping you away from the meetings.

 The plan was to ignore anything you wrote in social media as much as possible but counter it using the local media which promised they would put forward the library's defense against your claims.

 The strategy was to use the police to get you to stop coming to meetings and to make the community members not believe you by making you look like a liar.

 [I or someone] asked in the question answer period if what you were saying is true and if there were reports of things happening in the library and the Director said that unfortunately you had gotten ahold of old reports and were lifting them out of context.

 The Director said that no more incident reports would be written on matters in the library and that instead communication would be verbal to avoid FOIA.

 The ALA picked this up too and advised everyone to stop writing incident reports and to instead do them as voicemail round robins to be deleted every day. This way staff stays informed but there is no paper trail later.

 The takeaways and learning experiences from this matter involved how to neutralize attackers like you and your friend and how to make people not believe them and how to use allies in the community such as the police to make people like you go away.

 This was not the kind of workshop a lot of us thought we were signing up for and it [was a waste of everyone’s time]. I was upset that I had to listen to all this. Most of it seemed crazy to me because no one would answer the question on whether or not what you had said happened had happened and if the incident reports were true. It was all just a meeting about how to chase you and your friend away.

 There was also a big thing where Blondie got upset and had to justify why she decided to go on some radio show. I forget which one but the ALA woman said that you should never go on a live show unless you are well acquainted with the host and know the questions in advance. She said that Blondie made the mistake of allowing the hosts of the show to put words in her mouth and that damaged the library from a PR perspective. Blondie said she would never do a live interview again and would instead stick to putting out the press releases that the ALA would proof for her.

 The ALA and ILA said to never send emails but to call on the phone and the Office for Intellectual Freedom would help. They gave us the number and I remember writing it down. I remember writing down the phone numbers for the Director and Blondie too and the number for Bob from the ILA. No one wanted anything in writing just phone calls. Nothing important on voicemail either just say to call back. It was a big deal to keep saying to keep everything verbal and off email and not in writing.

 I am trying to think if there is anything else.

 You asked about a presentation that was given and we never received a copy of it but the Director and Blondie had pictures of you in a presentation. It had about 30 slides. They had pictures of you from online and pictures of your friend.

 Blondie kept pointing out that he is gay and also that he attacks the President and that he also told everyone years ago that Michelle Obama made a "whitey tape". I didn't know what she was talking about but she really seemed to have a personal hatred of your friend because Blondie got most upset when talking about him.

 The Director got most upset when talking about you however. She called you "Ms Fox" and never said the name Megan. Blondie said Megan and also said your friend's first name, I remember. But the Director kept saying "Ms, Fox" and her tea party colleague. She said that you live in Mokena and your friend lives in Chicago and you both have no business being in their library.

 I also remember that a jab was made at you for being a homeschooler and for being tea party members and that you should not be hanging out all day with a gay guy with your kids anyway.

 Why aren't you and him at work? Blondie asked that. Why don't you have jobs? And Blondie made a crack about maybe you should be at home taking care of your kids and not harassing the library.

 It was a very strange workshop. No one I know who went had a positive response to it.

 Then afterwards it was pretty much forgotten until March when the brouhaha happened and my boss came racing around telling me that I had to get rid of everything from the workshop. That's when my notes were taken.

 And now we are back at this again for some reason and I'm being asked if I got rid of all my notes because you are emailing about this again and everyone wants to make sure. My boss said [he/she] got a call about this to make sure. I don't know who the call was from. But I thought you should know because I've never been to a workshop like this where afterwards it was a big thing to collect all the notes and pretend like it never happened.

 And I never was at a conference where people talked so personally about patrons like you and your friend. That has never happened before and I thought you should know.

 I do not want any trouble so do not try to contact me or find me. This is the only contact I am going to have with you and I hope you understand and it is the only help I can give you.

—
URL of this page: 
safelibraries.blogspot.com/2017/01/brave-librarian-speaks-out.html

On Twitter:
@ALALibrary @HillBuzz @jaslar +Megan Fox +Megan Fox @MeganFoxWriter @OIF

Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Location: Chicago, IL, USA

Thursday, May 12, 2016

ALA's Child Porn Facilitation and Homophobia Exposed in Whistleblowers' New Book

American Library Association's child pornography facilitation in America's public libraries and its homophobia is about to be exposed in a book available soon on Amazon.

The book is "Shut Up! The Bizarre War that One Public Library Waged Against the First Amendment," by Megan Fox and Kevin DuJan.

Here is the book teaser on YouTube:



So?  What do you think?  Tell us in comments below.


NOTE ADDED 16 MAY 2016:

You know how librarians decry censorship (yet no book's been censored since 1963) and complain (rightly) about parents who challenge school books they didn't read first?  Well, in yet another double standard, that doesn't stop them from attacking the authors and their book before it is even published.  They oppose people seeing the dirty laundry they created and perpetuated.  And it doesn't stop them from the censorship of comments supportive of the book and its authors.  So they literally make things up to deride people then censor anyone who defends, as I did, in this case.

Here's a perfect example, with my comments censored, and the derision starts right in the title:
The funniest part is Wonkette pixelates what libraries allow per ALA diktat but not per the law, thereby tacitly admitting Megan Fox and Keven DuJan are right:


NOTE ADDED 26 MAY 2016:

Here the link to buy the book.  I bought five.

See also:




URL of this page: safelibraries.blogspot.com/2016/05/shutup.html

On Twitter: @ALALibrary +Amazon.com @Amazon @MeganFoxWriter @OIF @StoryTimeDigita +YouTube @YouTube

Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Location: Orland Park, IL, USA

Monday, April 27, 2015

Orland Park Public Library's 'Hearts' Prove Public Does Not Want Porn or Sexual Activity in Library

The Orland Park Public Library (link) (located in an affluent suburb of Chicago) has been rightfully criticized since October of 2013 (link) for refusing to come clean about incident reports that show child pornography was accessed in the library and that other sexual acts took place there (including men openly masturbating at computers to pornography, men exposing their genitals, men stalking female employees, and men sexually accosting children).

The Library's Board of Trustees refuses to address any of these matters or explain why the police and/or FBI were not called when child porn, in particular, was reported (by three witnesses!) to have been accessed in this library.


OPPL Director Mary Weimar Does Not Call Police on Child Porn

It is well-known that criminals use the anonymous Internet access in public libraries to download and trade child porn.  When it was reported to OPPL Director Mary Weimar that her library was being used to access child porn, Weimar chose not to call the police and made that same choice a day later when the man who accessed child porn returned to the OPPL.  Weimar told him to leave and not to access such materials on computers again. But she chose not to call the police.


Speculation Is OPPL Did Not Report Child Porn So Media Exposure Is Prevented

Many speculate the reason for this is that Weimar did not want a police report and arrest to be made in the matter—because that would have no doubt made the police blotter in the local paper—and from there it would have made national news.  Just as it did recently in Akron, Ohio (link) and in New Hanover, North Carolina (link); in these instances, like at the Orland Park Public Library in Illinois, men came to a public library to do things on computers that they knew they would be arrested for if they were doing them at home.  In Ohio and North Carolina, the men trading in child pornography were caught; in Orland Park, Mary Weimar allowed a man doing this to get away by choosing not to call the police.


American Library Association Applauds Stonewalling of Media and Public

All of this (and more! (link)) was uncovered in documents that the OPPL was compelled to produce responsive to FOIA requests in the last two years.  During that time, the American Library Association and the Illinois Library Association both heaped praise on the OPPL for stonewalling and refusing to address the roots of its problems.  The strategy at the ALA seems to be to reward libraries like the OPPL (and directors like Weimar) for looking the other way when child porn is accessed and other sex crimes are committed in libraries and to encourage libraries to not filter the Internet and allow pornography to be viewed on public computers (even though this violates disorderly conduct and lewd behavior ordinances in places like Orland Park).


Ignoring Problems/Crimes Is Deliberate Strategy, Part of Crisis Management

Another strategy employed by the OPPL is to keep ignoring their problems (and refusing to explain why police aren't called when serious crimes like child porn being accessed happen) while simultaneously spending a lot of energy on marketing and branding efforts.  This is called "crisis management" and the ALA teaches seminars on how to run such distractions with the right hand while a library's left hand keeps stonewalling and refusing to address problems.


The Cockamamie Crisis Management at OPPL Led by Bridget Bittman

Bridget Bittman of Orland Park Public Library
The latest cockamamie effort at the OPPL for "crisis management" was run by Bridget Bittman, the OPPL's public information coordinator/spokesman/crisis manager.  Bittman starred in a video posted to the OPPL's website recently (link), where she talked about staff encouraging library patrons to fill out "hearts" talking about what they loved about the library and what they felt was most important to them about the OPPL.  The video was called, "Our customers tell us why they love OPPL during National Library Week" and was filmed in the OPPL with Bittman as presenter. 

A FOIA request to the OPPL produced 101 photos of these "hearts" (link) (though the OPPL refused to produce actual copies of the "hearts" themselves, which is a violation of the Freedom of Information Act that will be addressed further).  As has been the pattern with this library, it appears some photographs are missing and it's believed that the OPPL censored "hearts" that contained criticism (therefore trampled the First Amendment rights of expression of the OPPL's critics).


"Hearts" Show Public Does Not Want Porn Nor Child Porn in Libraries

But the "hearts" that were produced by the OPPL tell an interesting story that shows clearly that the public does NOT want pornography to be accessed in the OPPL or for criminals to get away with using this library to trade child porn.

How do we know this?

It's simple: when given the chance to write what they love about the library and what they think is most important to them about the OPPL, not a single person wrote that they love the fact that men masturbate to pornography in this building or that criminals get away with accessing child porn there.  No one celebrated these facts.  Not a single person wrote on a "heart" that they are thrilled by Mary Weimar's decisions to look the other way when sex acts and hideous crimes happen in her library.

The most common things that people wrote were that they loved the free books at the library and that they liked the library staff who gave them the free books or would order free books for them.

People could have written about how much they loved the free porn that is accessible in the OPPL or about how they are positively delighted that staff purposefully look the other way and ignore a sexually hostile atmosphere in that public building.


No One Gave a "Heart" for Not Calling the Police on Child Porn

They could have handed in "hearts" asserting that they love the OPPL most of all because it is the one place in all of Chicago where they can access child porn and have a guarantee that staff will not call the police on them.  This guarantee is not only provided in the form of the incident report that shows definitively that Weimar twice made the decision not to call the police on a man seen accessing child porn…but also the fact that for two years now the OPPL Board of Trustees has declined every opportunity to explain Weimar's behavior and hold her accountable for this disastrous decision.


No One Gave a "Heart" About Freedom to Masturbate in Public Libraries

People had the chance with these "hearts" that Bittman encouraged them to fill out to say they love the OPPL because it is a place where they can whip out their penises and masturbate openly in public at taxpayer provided computers—but no one turned in a "heart" raving about the sex-positive and masturbation-friendly "Adult Computer Area" (that is so aptly named).

Don't you ever wonder why entities like the ALA and the Orland Park Public Library Board of Trustees waste so much effort and energy to keep pornography available on public computers in libraries and to thwart police investigations into things like child pornography—when NO ONE in the public ever seems to be appreciative of these efforts?

Literally, when given the chance to write down anything they loved about the OPPL and to say how much they appreciate the free porn access and the sexual environment in this public library, the public never says it wants these things or appreciates this aspect of what the OPPL's management is doing.   No one stands up, grabs a colorful "heart" from Bittman, and writes a thank you to libraries like the OPPL for allowing child porn to be accessed or for men to masturbate openly in a building full of children.

Why is that?

Who are these people who want creeps to come to libraries to pull out their penises and masturbate at computers where children are walking by?

Who are these people who think it's award-worthy that Mary Weimar deliberately and willfully CHOSE not to call the police when she was informed that child pornography was accessed in her building?

Wherever they are (and WHOMEVER they are!), they clearly aren't filling out any "hearts" on the subject.


Libraries Following ALA Diktat = Libraries Acting Against the Public Trust

Is it really in a library's mission statement and best interest to spend so much time and energy following the ALA's diktat—when that diktat puts the library in a position of going completely against what the public it serves wants?

Evidence child pornography in OPPL was not reported to police.


URL of this page: safelibraries.blogspot.com/2015/04/OPPL-hearts.html

On Twitter: @FBI @IllLibraryAssoc @MeganFoxWriter @OIF @OrlandPkLibrary @StoryTimeDigita @VillageOrlandPk


Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Location: Orland Park Public Library, 14921 South Ravinia Avenue, Orland Park, IL 60462, USA

Sunday, December 28, 2014

Commonwealth v Crayton: Librarians Report Child Porn and Preserve Computer Evidence for Police

Commonwealth v. Crayton provides a good example of a librarian reporting child pornography to the police and the library providing police with specially preserved electronic evidence of child porn viewing.  I have to say this because the American Library Association [ALA] works hard to convince librarians to ignore child porn and to delete evidence before police can access it, as I noted in my previous post, among others.

So below are relevant parts from the case I would like people to see showing this library and librarians doing the right thing by reporting the crime and preserving evidence, then providing police with that evidence, as opposed to librarians who adhere to ALA diktat.  Admirably, these Massachusetts librarians go so far as to preserve the evidence before it gets automatically deleted each night.  Really outstanding but really against what ALA advises.  These outstanding librarians who help protect their communities will never win ALA awards; such awards go to librarians who help facilitate child porn such as at the Orland Park Public Library in Illinois, as I proved in my previous post.

We are talking about school children seeing child pornography in a public library.

Also, since ALA policy as applied locally is often directly related to the facilitation of child pornography in public libraries, ALA media such as American Libraries magazine rarely discusses such matters or does so superficially.  I doubt it will report on Commonwealth v. Crayton, except to the extent I have made this prediction, so it might want to prove me wrong.

By the way, this case again illustrates that "Acceptable Use Policies" do not work.  ALA says acceptable use policies work and Internet filters do not.  In reality, it is the exact opposite.  The Cambridge Public Library policy is "Using library computers for illegal activity is strictly prohibited and will result in the loss of library privileges and possible criminal prosecution."  Clearly that had no effect.  On the other hand, the Federal Communications Commission [FCC] has just revealed library Internet filters work exceedingly well.  Such filters would have prevented the school children from seeing the child porn ALA facilitates.  I urge Cambridge Public Library to follow FCC advice and consider using Internet filtering software and tossing aside previous misconceptions ALA keeps promoting.

Here is the Commonwealth v. Crayton case, followed by an excerpt describing the factual background I would like people to read as an example of libraries working effectively to record and report child pornography viewing—too bad they did not use Internet filters to prevent such viewing in the first place but it is never too late to update policies:


470 Mass. 228, Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, 
17 December 2014, 
pp. 230-233, underline emphasis in original, bold emphasis mine, footnotes omitted:


Background.  We summarize the evidence at trial, reserving discussion of the evidence that pertains to the issues on appeal.  On January 21, 2009, between approximately 3:30 p.m. and 4 p.m., an eighth grade student, M.S., was doing homework at a computer in the basement technology center of the Central Square branch of the Cambridge Public Library. [FN 4]  A man she described as short, white, and bald, with a “little beard” and eyeglasses was sitting at an adjacent computer to the right of her. [FN 5]  She went to the library “[m]ostly every day,” but had never seen the man before.  When she looked at his computer screen, she saw an image of “a girl about ten years old, covering her chest.”  She could not tell whether the girl was wearing any clothes, because she saw only a “top view” and the man was “cover[ing] the computer screen” with the “umbrella-type” cover that was on it. [FN 6]  She “waved” at her friend, R.M., a ninth grade student, who was also in the technology center of the library, and urged him to look at the man's computer. R.M. testified that he “just got a quick glimpse of the computer,” and could only see “a small portion” of the screen, which displayed a young child wearing no clothes.  He saw only the side of the man's face; he described the man as bald with a goatee.  He went to the library every day after school, but had not seen the man before.  During trial, both M.S. and R.M.  identified the defendant as the man that they had seen at the computer on January 21.

M.S. and R.M. walked over to Ricardo Negron, a library employee who was working at the staff desk in the technology center that afternoon, and they told him that a person was looking at children wearing no clothes on the computer. [FN 7]  Before M.S. and R.M. approached him, Negron had observed M.S. at computer no. one and a white male, “perhaps” in his “early thirties,” bald, with eyeglasses, whom he had seen before at the technology center, at computer no. two. [FN 8]  The police later showed Negron an array of photographs, but he was unable to identify anyone from the array. [FN 9] [FN 10]

Library users were required to log on to a computer by entering their library bar code, so when the two teenagers alerted Negron to what they had seen, Negron looked up the log-in information for computer no. two.  While he was doing so, the man using computer no. two logged off and left the room.  The log inquiry revealed that a person using the library card of an eighteen year old male, “perhaps of Asian descent,” had logged on to computer no. two at 3:08 p.m. and logged off at 3:55 p.m. [FN11]  At some time after 3:55 p.m., Negron went upstairs to speak to the library manager, Esme Green.  Green went downstairs to the technology center, looked at two “video clips” saved on computer no. two, saw that they depicted an approximately twelve year old girl, “either naked or almost naked, masturbating,” and telephoned the police.

When Negron went upstairs, another library employee, Ricardo Ricard, went downstairs to staff the technology center.  Having learned of the allegation, Ricard logged on to computer no. two, saw a folder on the computer with the label “W,” and looked at a video file inside the folder, which showed a nude female child.  Because he was concerned that the library computers deleted all files when they were shut down for the night, Ricard transferred the folder containing the file to a universal serial bus (USB) drive, which he later gave to Green.  He then disabled the computer's “reboot” software so that the computer would retain the files that were then on it.

Ricard had not seen the man who used computer no. two on January 21, but he was aware of the man's physical description.  On January 22, when he saw a man who matched that description in the library lobby, he told Green of the man's presence, and Green notified the police.

Detectives Brian O'Connor and Pam Clair of the Cambridge police department arrived at the library and saw the defendant at a computer with another individual.  The detectives observed the defendant for approximately twenty to thirty minutes at a computer that displayed a “MySpace” profile page, “looking at MySpace.”  As the defendant was leaving the library, Detective O'Connor asked to speak with him, and the defendant agreed.  The defendant admitted that he had been in the library's computer room the previous day.  He said he had used one of the computers for five minutes and then switched to another computer, which he identified as computer no. two, to check his electronic mail (e-mail).  The defendant said that his e-mail address was cblizzard@yahoo.com.  He also said that he did not have his own MySpace profile, but used his friend's profile.

After this conversation, Detective O'Connor obtained the USB drive that Ricard had given to Green, seized computer no. two, and copied the folder labeled “W” onto a compact disc.  After obtaining a search warrant, Detective O'Connor conducted a forensic search of the hard drive of computer no. two.  That search revealed twenty-seven “cookies,” which O'Connor described as “text file[s]” that store information on an Internet browser regarding a Web site that a particular user has visited on the Internet. [FN 12]  The first of these cookies, entitled “magic-Lolita(1).txt,” was created at 3:14 p.m. on January 21; the last, entitled “www.innocentgirls(1).txt,” was created at 3:48 p.m. that day.  Detective O'Connor also uncovered “Yahoo searches” on computer no. two that had been conducted between 3:14 and 3:25 p.m. on January 21 using such search terms as “One hundred percent Lolita” and “Top Lolita.”  Detective O'Connor also located temporary Internet files on the computer's hard drive in which images were automatically downloaded by the Internet browser from a Web site that the user visited.  In those temporary files, he found approximately 210 photographs where children were engaged in sexual acts, of which seven were printed out and admitted as exhibits at trial.  These seven images were created on the computer between 3:27 and 3:50 p.m. on January 21.  The detective also located six video files on the hard drive of the computer, of which two video files were located in a temporary Internet file folder and four video files were located in a folder entitled “W.”  The four video files in the “W” folder, which were played for the jury, were created on the computer between 3:43 and 3:54 p.m. that day. Detective O'Connor also located a MySpace page in the temporary Internet files reflecting a log-in date and time of January 21 at 3:13 p.m.  The MySpace page identifies the user as “Walter”; the e-mail address associated with the MySpace page was C-Blizzard69@MySpace.com.


NOTE ADDED 23 MAY 2016:

Updated the judicial opinion link to an archived version.


URL of this page: safelibraries.blogspot.com/2014/12/commonwealth-v-crayton.html

On Twitter: @ALAlibrary @AmLibraries @CambridgePL @CambridgePolice @OIF

Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Location: Cambridge Public library, Broadway, Cambridge, MA 02138, USA
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)