Friday, 27 August 2010

Textile (non-nudist) Teachers Charged With Child Porn Offences

Because people keep focussing on irrelevant things when a minority group gets charged with a crime (e.g. "Vegan father charged with assaulting kids" - what does his veganism have to do with it?; "Muslim charged with something that has nothing to do with him being a Muslim", etc.), I've decided to play the people who write stuff like that at their own game.

So I am reporting today on two textile primary school teachers ('textiles' is a non-aggressive name used by nudists to refer to non-nudists), who have been arrested on suspicion of possessing indecent images of children.

The accused, both males, work at different primary schools - one, aged 43, teaches at St Patrick's School in Earlswood, Solihull, and the 37-year-old teaches at Monkspath School, in the Shirley area of Solihull.

A helpline has been set up to offer assistance and advice: 0121 704 8300.


These people are wearing clothing so do they count as textiles? It is generally accepted that when someone's genitals are showing, they are not clothed, so you should be safe with these people.

So yet again, a textile is arrested for child porn offences. Doesn't this just go to show how disgusting and vile textiles are, and that clothed people should be banned from everywhere?! After all, with the majority of people who have committed a sexual crime against a child being textiles, how can we possibly trust these people, no matter how safe they insist their lifestyle choice is?!

It seems we should only ever let nudists near our children and make sure no clothed person is allowed anywhere near our kids. Only when these perverts are banned from society will we be safe!

You can see one of these clothed people here: http://www.flickr.com/photos/xdzombiez/4906261403/in/pool-60117213@N00 - WARNING! CONTAINS TEXTILE! Please note that as far as I know this person has never actually been arrested or charged with any crime whatsoever, nor ever came under any suspicion of one, and if you think she has then you have clearly missed the point of this article.

And here's a naked father and son sharing a bath together: http://comps.fotosearch.com/comp/JCE/JCE148/father-son-6-8_~8613.jpg

Which one of those pics looks most natural to you?!

3 comments:

Anonymous said...

THIS IS ONE OF THE MOST SICKENING, PAEDOPHILE THINGS I'VE EVER READ! GET YOUR HEAD OUT OF YOUR ARSE AND YOU WILL START TO SEE THE SICK TWISTED REALITY THAT IS THE FACT THAT YOU, YES YOU, ARE ATTRACTED TO CHILDREN, NOT NUDISM. IF YOU ARE A NUDIST, WHY ARE THERE NO PICTURES OF YOU, ANYWHERE ON THE INTERNET WHATSOEVER, YET YOU CONSTANTLY SHARE OTHERS WITHOUT EVEN HAVING PERMISSION? (A CHILD UNDER 10 CAN'T BE HELD LEGALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR MURDER, SO DON'T TELL ME YOU HAVE "THEIR" PERMISSION TO SHARE THEIR NAKED BODY!). CHILD PROTECTION LAWS ARE MADE TO STOP SICK FUCKS LIKE YOU ACCESSING CHILDREN...

Anonymous said...

Whoever wrote the above comment has to be the dumbest inbred moron to ever have walked the face of the earth. In fact I'm surprised this "person" managed to type that comment, since they clearly move around on all fours. Unfortunately there's no getting through to people like this, for one simple reason; they're stupid. Oh and that key close to the left of the keyboard is called "Caps Lock". Use it. You, sir/madam/creature, are the one with your head up your arse. It was a good article and the fact that you actually, very clearly, missed the entire point of it, only makes your astounding ignorance shine through from your butt crack - where your brain evidently resides. I hope you keep a diary so that on the off-chance that an intelligent thought ever passes through your head, you can be sure to record the event and have something worthwhile to look back on when you're old. And probably still stupid. Come on, spread those cheeks, let a little air get to your brain, and then try and show just a glimmer of intelligence, rather than attacking a quite clever article with your meaningless and idiotic ramblings. People like you are the curse of mankind. I could try to explain what this article is actually about, but there's no point - you're too stupid!

To the original poster, well done. Please try to ignore the less fortunate among us who don't have the capacity to grasp what you were trying to say. And I couldn't agree more with what you've said and the point you're trying to make.

Nottwisted said...

To the "anonymous" (PJ in disguise) commentator , you are a dirty filthy nonce. You can disguise it anyway you like but you ARE attracted to children, I've seen your "It's ok for an child to rub sunscreen on an adult's erect penis" PJ. You made money selling child porn DVDs you sick fucker! Yeah I know about that, the so called "nudist" DVDs when you said you were doing surveys. Sick fuck.