Text 33391, 160 rader
Skriven 2009-06-15 20:31:24 av Ross Cassell (1:123/456)
  Kommentar till text 33390 av Michiel van der Vlist (2:280/5555)
Ärende: Saberi vs Blom
======================
Hello Michiel!

16 Jun 09 01:14, you wrote to me:

 MV>>> You brought up the ethics of the accused. That gives me every
 MV>>> right to bring up the ethics of his accusers.

 RC>> Irrelevant, the decision to act was Bloms alone..

 MV> It is very relevant as Blom's decision was influenced - I would even
 MV> say triggered - by the unethical acts of the US law enforcement.
 MV> Unethical acts that preceded Blom's decision.

So the devil made him do it?

 RC>> Blom was a victim of his own libido, as sick as it was.

 MV> It is not sick to have a properly functioning libido. Not having one
 MV> is a medical disorder. Another word for "sick".

A properly functioning libido doesnt include having sex with children,
especially those thousands of miles away.

 RC>> Not when you know in your heart of hearts that one possible
 RC>> choice you could make is illegal.

 MV> How on earth am I to know that?

Because sex with children is wrong and sending nude pics of yourself to a child
is wrong...

You did forget that he also sent pics of himself didnt you?

 MV> If someone I have reason to trust, offers me a choice, how on earth am
 MV> I going to know it is illegal?

Why would you trust a 14yo, nevermind, you answered that further down.

 MV> This theory of "ignorance of the law is no excuse" is fine in theory,
 MV> but in practise it is impossible to know all the laws of one's own
 MV> country, let alone for every country one visits.

Yet is no excuse for breaking the law...

How far down the streets of any German City would a tourist get before being
stopped by police if said tourist wore a t-shirt with a swaztika on it?

Your kind is constantly bellyaching about how arrogant USA tourists think our
laws apply to them when travelling abroad, yet Blom essentially held the same
arrogant assumption.

 MV>  Normally this is not
 MV> a big problem, most people stay close enough to the law to not get
 MV> into trouble, but it fails when someone is deliberately trying  to
 MV> make you break the law. That is probably why it is considered
 MV> unethical and illegal here. It is just too damned easy to make someone
 MV> break the law.

No one made Blom do anything he wasnt wanting to do, up til his arrest, he was
thinking 14yo girl, the thing you dont understand is, what if it was a 14yo
girl?

You dismiss the fact that he could have chosen to have stayed in the Airport
concourse or gotten a motel room and stayed to himself, until the time came to
catch his connecting flight... **BETTER YET** he could have booked a flight
that took him onward to California, perhaps non-stop or with minimal layover.

He could have said to himself, "I know better than to try to have sex with a
young girl in a foreign country"..

But noooooo, Michiel wants to employ the devil made me do it defense.

 RC>> We arent talking about you being given information in a money
 RC>> making deal, only to later be found out as a scam... Your
 RC>> argument holds water here for you made a good faith choice to do
 RC>> something you thought was legal.

 MV> Now why in this case is it enough to "think it was legal" and why was
 MV> that not in the case of Blom?

Because in the analogy people invest and risk their money all the time in legal
ventures, it stands to reason that these people get scammed, but the choices
they were led to make in getting scammed did not involve themselves in breaking
any laws..

Blom was presented with no less than 2 choices, to not go or to go, he had to
know that one of those choices was/is illegal. If he did not know what the age
of consent was, it is his fault for not researching that, he did have the
Internet to get those answers for him.

 RC>> Blom choice was to try to do something illegal,

 MV> No, he did not deliberately *choose* to do something illegal. He did
 MV> not get himself a list of things known to be illegal in the USA and
 MV> then pick something from that list. No, he choose to do something that
 MV> he later found out to be illegal. Big difference.

Ignorance of the law is no excuse.

Rather his mistake might be assuming Nederland laws were used all over.

 RC>> his ethics are fair game here, in the example I used for you
 RC>> above, only your gullibility could possibly come into question.

 MV> Legally, ignorance of the law is no excuse. Morally it makes a big
 MV> difference.

and it is morally wrong for an adult to seek sexual relations with minor
children, cant have your cake and eat it too Michiel..

 RC>> When one gets scammed, they are the victims, the choices they
 RC>> made in getting scammed werent necessarily efforts to do anything
 RC>> illegal.

 MV> When one is tricked into doing something illegal one is a victim also.

Not in this case...

In this case the proper choice made by Blom would have attended his friends
wedding and returned home without incident, but the devil made him do it.

 RC>> Blom made an effort to try to have sex with a minor. He bought
 RC>> the plane ticket, altered his travel plans etc..

 MV> You still ignore the fact that it was not his own initiative that
 MV> brought him to Chicago. Had the cop not invited him, nothing would
 MV> have happened.

You dont know that, for all you have is the tail end of a case when someone got
caught, what if the 14yo was real?

 RC>> *HE* chose to take those footsteps that led to possible
 RC>> illegality.

 MV> On invitation by the cop posing as a 14yo.

and there have been countless cases when it was real 14yo's with real
invitations that turned out badly for the 14yo.

 RC>> Tell me something, would you seek sex with a 14yo girl?

 MV> No, I would not seek it. And if offered without seeking, I would
 MV> decline. Not because I consider it unethical, but because I am old and
 MV> wise enough to know that what looks too good to be true most likely is
 MV> too good to be true.

 MV> A woman under 30 showing willingness to have sex with me wants
 MV> something else. My money, my car, my house, information, or whatever.
 MV> Something that I would not voluntarily give her.

Then why didnt Blom possess your scrupples, perhaps he lacks ethics?

==
Ross
Fidonet Feeds Or Fidonet In Your Newsreader: http://www.easternstar.info
E-mail: ross(at)cassell(dot)us | Other Places: http://links.cassell.us
Fidonet Netmail Routing Chart Z1 Only: http://netmail.fidonet4u.info
... Bigot: Anyone who's winning an argument with a liberal.
--- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5-b20060121
 * Origin: The Eastern Star - Spartanburg, SC USA (1:123/456)