Groups | Search | Server Info | Login | Register

Groups > triangle.arts > #16

Re: When SCOTUS does not obey the laws of the land - neither should the people.

Cross-posted to 5 groups.

Show all headers | View raw

In article <nhfh5g$fmr$2@gioia.aioe.org>
marston shores <kp@fi.re> wrote:
>
> On 9/23/2015 2:29 PM, K Wills (Shill #3) wrote:
> > Yet nothing that violated any of the canons listed occurred. You
> > may deny this, if you want and/or need. But the fact remains, no
> > violations occurred.
>
> Say now fiend, what is your record telling us all?
>
> http://townhall.com/columnists/mikeadams/2009/12/07/wral_white_rapists_and_lombard

WRAL: White Rapists and Lombard

Over the course of the last few weeks, I have received several 
requests for an update on the Frank Lombard case. Lombard is the 
(now former) Duke administrator who was accused last summer of 
attempting to allow, and even arrange for, strangers he met on 
the internet to rape his adopted child.

A few days ago, WRAL, a Raleigh-based news station, released an 
update on the case. That update is worth re-printing here, along 
with my commentary, both for what the update says and what it 
does not say:

“A former Duke University employee has agreed to plead guilty to 
a federal charge of sexual exploitation of a minor, authorities 
said Tuesday.”

Here, the “sexual exploitation of a minor” is not described in 
any great detail. That is good because the sexual exploitation 
Lombard inflicted upon his own child is simply too graphic to 
reprint fully. I have read all of the documentation in this case.

It contains descriptions of conduct, which can only be described 
as sub-human.

“Frank M. Lombard, 42, of 24 Indigo Creek Trail in Durham, will 
enter the plea in federal court in Washington, D.C., on Dec. 17, 
authorities said. He likely will face 15 years in prison, 
authorities said.”

It is interesting that the first demographic mentioned is age, 
as opposed to race or sexual orientation. As I proceed with my 
commentary it may be worthwhile to ask, once again, a question I 
will ask now: Is Frank Lombard’s age the most relevant 
demographic variable in relation to the charges to which he 
agreed to plead guilty?

“Authorities on Tuesday filed a criminal information in the 
case, indicating that they were negotiating a plea and didn't 
want to pursue an indictment against Lombard. According to the 
filing, Lombard coerced a minor, identified only as ‘M.L.,’ into 
engaging in sexual conduct so that Lombard could transmit a live 
video of it over the Internet.”

And now we have another mention of the “minor” followed by the 
assertion that the criminal information only identifies the 
minor as “M.L.” But WRAL knows precisely what the “L” in “M.L.” 
means. It means Lombard. It is his adopted black son.

But to acknowledge that “M.L” is the son, not daughter, of Frank 
Lombard is to acknowledge that Lombard is gay. And the Gods of 
Diversity frown upon the notion that males can be victims of 
rape and that the perpetrators can be homosexual men.

And to acknowledge the race of the victim is to suggest that 
homosexuals might be capable of committing hate crimes, even if 
they do not play Lacrosse. Hate crimes legislation is supposed 
to protect, not prosecute, gay men.

And, finally, there should be no mention (yet) that his son was 
adopted. The public, when confronted with such information, 
might use it to form dangerous opinions – such as the opinion 
that gay men should not be adopting little boys.

According to the news media, the general public is not capable 
of processing all of this information. People in the news media 
are the only ones who can be trusted with all of the benefits 
(and responsibilities) that attach to the full disclosure of 
information.

“Lombard was arrested in June after authorities said Washington 
police caught him in a sting operation soliciting an adult to 
have sex with his adopted 5-year-old child.”

This is certainly odd. WRAL finally mentions that Frank 
Lombard’s child was adopted. But they fail to mention his sex or 
his race. In fact, the way this paragraph is worded, it is not 
entirely clear that the incident leading to his arrest is the 
incident leading to the information – or that it led to any 
formal criminal charges.

So let me clarify this very sloppy portion of the WRAL release. 
The child coerced into engaging in sexual conduct on a webcam 
was Frank Lombard’s adopted black son. Lombard performed oral 
sex on every portion of the little boy’s body that was capable 
of expelling human waste.

I hope this clarifies any ambiguity. I will withhold further 
details.

“Duke fired Lombard in July from his position as associate 
director of the university's Center for Health Policy.”

I think we can now see why WRAL has withheld certain relevant 
information. Lombard was a high-level administrator in the area 
of health policy. To reveal his sexual orientation would raise 
certain questions, which might violate someone’s right to feel 
comfortable at all times.

For example, “Are certain sexual practices both detrimental to 
individual health and prevalent in the gay community?” And, 
“Could such practices, if widely adopted (no pun intended), be 
detrimental to the public health?” Finally, “Is a homosexual man 
the best candidate available to help run a Center for Public 
Health and teach a course about AIDS at Duke University?”

According to the people at WRAL, and many at Duke University, 
Frank Lombard is no ordinary white racist. Nor is he an ordinary 
white rapist.

He is gay and entitled to special treatment in the court of 
public opinion. To refuse to treat him differently would promote 
hatred and discrimination.

And that would send a dangerous message to small children. Above 
all else, we must protect small children from danger.
 

Back to triangle.arts | Previous | Next | Find similar

Thread

Re: When SCOTUS does not obey the laws of the land - neither should the people. "Sherri Zann Rosenthal" <sherrizann.rosenthal@durhamnc.gov> - 2016-05-18 23:21 +0200

csiph-web