Community Care: ‘Liberation of Children to Enjoy Their Natural Sexuality’

PIE (Paedophile Information Exchange) was an advocacy group for child and paedophile “liberation” that operated openly throughout the seventies and eighties in Britain. As the name suggests, paedophiles openly campaigned for the rights of themselves and children to have sexually intimate relationships, whilst being able to find each other easily, and support one another. The magazine, MAG-PIE  (pied piper leading the children away) gave each other open access to criminal friends (or the elites the ability to have a wider circle of people to throw under the bus and hide behind). The labour government was extremely pro-PIE, including Harriet Harman, who met her husband Jack Dromey working for the NCCL for nine years, but apparently did not know what she was often supporting.

Patricia Hewitt, Leon Britton, Greville Genner, Cyril Smith and the ex-head of M16 Sir Peter Hayman also protected this group for their freedom of speech.

There were many social workers and educational bodies supporting what these people had to say, and some voices even claimed that in some British counties that governmental support would close down overnight if paedophiles were to be removed from education, social work, courts and our security systems.

Although we can valiantly say, “but these people have been imprisoned for their beliefs,” we can also say, “not all of them,” and the ‘work’ that they did for their cause helped their position to come to light today. That position is of the paedophile sympathiser and the right for children to make their own choices. We have so-believed ‘innocent’ standards and guidelines everywhere, which increase the child’s responsibility for himself (great, you say), for the removal of the parents rights (well, some parents are pretty shit at it, you say) and a huge push for ‘shared responsibility’ (well we should look out for each other, you say), and because of this, everyone else has the right to make the call on how your child is brought up.

Now we all know how they easily manipulate the masses, and how easily they create our children’s behaviour, so the real decisions made by the ‘shared responsibility’ of society will not actually be of the society, but of those manipulating it.

At this moment in time the Paedophile question is riding high and many are opposed, and in fact this is very dangerous ground they are treading. Many years ago we all joked about priests and boys, and when it came to light we rolled our eyes, now the truth is here that our governments are part of paedophile rings that Theresa May was once investigating, then all of a sudden she is a Prime Minister and… Oooops. Just a small note to all of you lefties, remember that this is not a conservative or labour thing as you keep expressing; it is a government and world leaders thing, as May hid a lot of information on both parties.

We ignore, we joke, we roll our eyes. The exposure helps them to hide, but I am not saying we should not expose them, as that is ridiculous; I am merely pointing out that the manipulation upon us is great and they manage to the masses look at the truth and then ignore it, perhaps because if we accepted it then we would have a real ‘shared responsibility’ and have to do something other than complain. We do not want to take this responsibility en masse. Some people are looking and falling for the sympathy bullshit they tried to peddle in the 70’s and 80’s, but our people were not anywhere near ready to accept this, so did they had to feed the lesser to the lions, to buy them time?

So are we ready yet? They are pushing paedophilia in the same way they did before, and some of our people are buying this crime; they want to rehabilitate and maybe lower the age of consent. They are starting to sympathise with the perpetrator over the victim. Our academic literature reeks of the aims of PIE in 1975:

The points in the video concern me very much. When we look at the legislation surrounding children, it is as if it was written for the aims of PIE. Children today are, because of legislation as these men above wanted, ‘recognised in their own right’. Children today are, because of legislation these men suggested, ‘properly educated about sex… at a far earlier age’. Monkey see, monkey do – that will help the paedophile get his so-called consent.

The National Council for Civil Liberties aided the exposure of PIE alongside members of the Labour party by releasing papers like ‘Should we pity the paedophiles?’ in a ‘social works trade paper’ named Community Care. which advocated,

Liberation of Children to enjoy their natural sexuality”

Peter Righton was a member of PIE, he was also the director of education within the national institute of social work. PIE applied for the age consent to be lowered to the age four (nothing torah about that). Keth Hose made a speech at the ” Campaign for Homosexual Equality” in Sheffield 1775 that it was time to,

alleviate the suffering of many adults and children”

Gordon Brown and Robin Cook ‘accidentally’ also sponsored conferences made by PIE, under the belief that it was all about gay rights. Many MPs were allegedly ‘duped’ into giving money to the NCCL (National Council for Civil Liberties) to pay for the publications, events and administration of PIE.

When reading the manifesto of PIE  it would be hard to detect, if taken in parts, what was their material and what came from the Kinsey Institute literature. One is an ‘institute of sex’, which gives us sexual education for our children to be taught, and the other is a manifesto from an outlawed paedophile exchange, yet they sound like they could be writing from the same page. Our children in Britain now have to take law abiding sexual education classes from the age of four. Do I have to remind everyone of all of the research that shows children learn by watching? There are now children ‘sexually abusing’ other children at the ages of four and five in school playgrounds.

All children from the age of four will be taught about safe and healthy relationships… Children will also be taught, at an appropriate age, about sex” (BBC Sex Education to be Mandatory in UK schools).

The aims of sexual education is to bring awareness where awareness should not be, and I believe it is to intentionally make our children engage in sexual activity with each other, much sooner than they would have done otherwise, and unfortunately with adults also.

The entirety of the message from our academic ‘experts’ is that harm cannot always be defined. It concentrates its understanding on the paedophile’s point of perception to discuss most of its views upon research. Some paedophiles are deluded and will tell themselves anything, how their emotions overcome them and that they believe what they want to believe; they believe they are loving, they are caring, that it is consensual and not abusive, that if they are not being beaten off, screamed at and the child is not repeatedly saying no, then it is okay, this is what the child wants.

Children rarely oppose the adults in their life and will often just go along with what is happening, but this does not mean that they enjoy it, and it definitely does not mean it is okay. It means children do as their told, that they trust adults, that they take their lead and do not argue, even when they are uncomfortable, hurting or unhappy. It is a child’s role to please an adult, as it is in the interest of their very survival to do so. Adults care for children, or at least they are supposed to.

In 1937 a woman called Lauretta Bender (Later Schilder) and a man named Amram Blau, a Haredi Rabbi from Jerusalem, came along and provided us with the article ‘The Reaction of Children to Sexual Relations With Adults’, which declared their own findings and the findings of Rasmussen. They declared children who had been seen by police and/or the hospital due to sexual abuse/rap, had no lasting negative effects from this event.

We also have Carney Landis, whose most famous experiment was chopping up rats whilst people watched and photographing the facial expressions. Carney found that the women he researched did not have any feelings of an ‘unpleasant’ nature in regard to their abuse. Some experts like to say that from their research they felt some children had benefited from the experience as it gave them an understanding they could bring into adult life.

All in all many ‘experts’ gave the founding ideas that;

sexual assault of children by adults does not have particularly detrimental effects on the child’s subsequent personality development.”

I will leave you with this, what is deemed normal sexual behaviour has been told to us from the research compiled by Kinsey following interviews with murderers, paedophiles and prostitutes. Our children are taught what is normal sexual behaviour from the data of criminals and the mentally unfit.

Our standards and Legislative practices are penned by people who I would call worse than paedophiles; they are not just hoping the child is quiet so they can misinterpret a selfish sick viewpoint. Hiding behind these regular ‘everyday’ paedophiles that our government wants you to sympathise with, is something else, a new level of sinister. Watch Beyond Pizzagate if you have not already – what courage our Renegade video makers have.




One thought on “Community Care: ‘Liberation of Children to Enjoy Their Natural Sexuality’

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s