Once again...The stupidity on this board shows it's ugly head.

also, the girls in the virginsphotos on archive.org show models that are used in promotions of the current virginsphotos. They do not apepar to be underage but the point is, it's the same people.

ah shit, don't click that link folks, it's actually showing previews for some of the sites now. When I checked last night it wasen't.

if the site is not legal or you think it's not legal then report it 2 http://www.missingkids.com/

missingkids.com **WILL** do something about it.

Orangebill is big in c/p fucking asswipes

Thanks, they seem to have a nice reporting system. Very detailed.

true true.. there was something Feb. 14th in Information week about c/p.

Also I'm not 100% sure but I believe someone that posts here ( one of the BIG guys ) is into it. not 100% sure so I will not post what I have found out so far. Just turned it over, last week or the week before.

if true on man

That doesn't surprise me one bit.

It's amazing to see how many people have posted in this thread that I thought had a clue and as it turns out...They don't.

Sad...Very sad.

If you are going to comment on CP then maybe you should know WTF cp is first. :2 cents:

You know what bugs me the most about all these CP idiots on the net is that if you find some information about some and make a detailed report you are admitting to have viewed it and it CAN be used against you.

I once had a cop tell me to throw out my hard drive when I reported CP to the local detachment once. He proceeded to tell me that even though I didn't want to view it in the first place and that I am reporting it that I can get ins erious trouble just for the data being on the drive. He said it's best to find an annonymous way of reporting it. Such as from a library or via snail mail with no return addy.

That's fucked.

The legal definition of what CP is in relation to what GFY describes CP as are two totally different things.

I think it's more of a question of what is morally right here. Truth be told, those BD sites probably have nothing really 'illegal' to them but it doesn't mean that they shouldn't be shut down or the people involved exposed.

Everything I've seen about Orangebill is that it's an FBI front. :2 cents:

How do you back the info that orangebill is a fbi front ? A quick search on google shows them to be used on a number of c/p sites, especially in Russia.

I can't speak for you but I live in a country which has specific laws in place for these kinds of things.

Although I do not agree with people shooting content of this nature...IT IS LEGAL and if anybody ever started a thread like this about me when I was producing legal content then I would sue every last bitch who even suggested that I was producing CP. Labeling it as underage is one thing but CP?

Yes, IMHO this shit should not be legal but it is and until those laws are changed there is nothing that can be done about it.

Well they have been around for awhile now and not shutdown , so it makes sense the feds run it and monitor it.

Heres most likey how it happened..

FEDS rushed in and said , your cp bastards are under arrest. We have 2 ways of doing this. We arrest you and you spend along time in prison OR we send over 2 new "employees" to help you and you continue to make $$ and we never bother you again.

The law is interpreted by a judge.

In canada and the u.s.a there are laws against underage nude girls in sexual positions.

Im pretty sure spreading your legs and showing a bald pussy would be considered sexual.

But like i said , those thing are considered by a judge. So its hard to say. Is it legal in my opinion NO.

I wonder why how many russians are now using some US adress and front company to continue their business with a "legal" outfit.

"when u are in rome...do as the romans do" THAT's IT!

Just for the book. This is the address of their 2257 record keeper.......some adresse in the Ukraine....Why in the world would some legit american company keeop their 2257 records with some guy in the Ukraine ????

Custodian of Records:

Serg Procenko
Pobedi str., 152
Dnepropetrovsk, 35063, Ukraine
Phone: +380672321976
E-mail: [email protected]

Interesting. I just noticed something else that "may" prove the same people that run xxl-cash are involved with the BD child sites.

From looking at virginsphotos on archive.org using an archive of theirs of the site when it was listed in bd company (which shows virginsphotos as well as many child sites in their program) I have noticed some similarities that can't just be a coincidence.

On the virginsphotos current site:

All The Material posted on VirginsPhotos is copyrighted.
The models are 18 or older
18 U.S.C. 2257 Statement
Privacy Policy

No part of this website can be copied without our permission!

On archive.org's version of virginsphotos:

All The Material posted on Virgins Photos is copyrighted.

All The Models Are At Least 18 Years Old!
No part of this website can be copied without our permission!

How often do two separate people use the same wording in their end statement?

i checked some of the sites and i didnt expect they were really underage.... fuck that

brutal man.

bum for the Friday crew

nothing i seen so far in this thread, changes my oppinion..

the hosting company should pull this off or they will be in big trouble. :321GFY

And The Picture?

holy shit....I really hope somebody takes care of this sick freaking pedos...

He is still here...

The just ignore these issues. Unbeliebvable. And they are still trying to do more business here.

Regardless if it's legal or not, the issue is that they are catering to sick fucks that like children and that is wrong regardless of how you look at it!

Many folks claim to be advocates of free speech and then get upset when they see such "art" sites.

While such sites offend many people, so does the content of most adult sites - censorship is a slippery slope ...

Going to digress a bit - how come such "art" sites offends so many here and yet images on consumptionjunction.com, ogrish.com, and rotten.com don't?

Often the argument is put forward that the possession of a picture showing a crime, in particular child porn, itself is a crime - if so, then why aren't the many pictures depicting beheadings, shootings, etc shown on the three above mentioned sites illegal too?

Of course the simple answer is "morals" ... and that's opens a pandara box of questions ... so while it's understandable for many folks to dislike "art" sites, going after them too hard leads to situations in which law-abidding adult site operators can be targeted too, such as depicting *age 18+* models as appearing to be younger; merely implying they are younger and/or depicting them in certain types of scenes, such as cheerleader practice, has become risky ... and to reiterate I'm speaking of age 18+ models!

I'm not saying such "art" content is desirable, but folks concerned about freedom of speech (everyone in this business should be!) need to be wary of overreaction.

Lastly, to be clear, I agree with many others here in that "art" sites are certainly something that should NOT be associated with GFY, since this is not an "art" discussion site :error

Ron

don't think that sites with underage model posing nude in sexual exoplicit poses has anything to do with art :mad:

You seem confused, nobody is talking about 18+ models dressed to look younger, we're referring to sites with 8-14 yr nude boys and girls in sexual poses modeled under the veil of "art". I see no correlation in your analogy trying to compare the offensiveness of violent and gross pictures on mainstream sites with this underage nudity.

I just viewed the tour thumbs on the schoolpassion.com page ... or is there another site you're referring to?

There does NOT appear, at least in the tour thumbs, to be any clear-cut child porn pics.

With that said, some of the tour pics are legally borderline in that they could be interpreted different ways ... "thought-crime" comes to mind ... for example many nudism pictures could easily be considered illegal child porn and legal art at the same time!

Don't think so ... zap on over to Amazon.com / bd.com and search for nudism ... some very controversal stuff there, including a few that have been the focus of court cases.

Ultimately the legality simply comes down to intent of the *viewer* ... wow, that's scary quite really for that logic can and does to a lesser extent apply to *adult* porn as well - anyone doubting that need only look at the terms and conditions (TOS) of many adult sites that restrict access to content/purchase based on one's location ... and an aspect of local community standards is "intent" of the viewer.

Many folks here think this stuff is all cut and dry; certainly would like to have it that way ... but the reality just isn't that simple.

Lastly, to follow-up on lazycash's other point ... lasycash's comment "I see no correlation in your analogy trying to compare the offensiveness of violent and gross pictures on mainstream sites with this underage nudity" was exactly the type of comment I'd expected - so torture, murder, guts and gore, etc are all ok? Difficult to have one without the other - to think they're different issues reiterates that strong moral feelings is what's driving much of this discussion - not saying that's wrong, but keep in mind that strong morals feelings also apply to adult porn business too - many of the laws used against child porn, while to some extent helping to protect childrem, are mainly designed to control adult porn; make it more difficult for adults to obtain - and anyone doubting that, just look at the TOS of any decent adult site ... the amount of regulations of what one can show or not show (talking adults!) has greatly increased since the mid 80s; folks working in this business a long time are quite familiar with the dramatic restrictions placed on content these days ... there's even a whole side business of selling adult content prior to the mid 80s/early 90s.

Weew, really covered a lot of groud there ... guess the point is, again, that strong feelings is understandable, but overreaction can be far worse in the longrun for the industry and personal freedom; natural human rights.

Ron

bump for Saturday

if it's legal why is there no such site operating fully legit under US law, with US postal adress, US payment processor, etc .. ?

Where is the child porn on schoolpassion.com?

Dont get me wrong, usually if Russians are involved on the internet something dodgy is going on but i simply dont see cp on that site.

Exactly :2 cents:


Ivy

"soft CP" (children posing nude, but not sexually explicit) is only art for some people ...

holy shit what a crackhead

the links to the real sick shit has been removed - you dont have to look very far to see it tho - def underage - avoid like the plague people

Technically if there's no sexual hints or poses then yes, though if the girls are pre-pubecent then you're only catering to one crowd, which has arguments for and against providing such content, safety of the individuals, though also exploitation comes to mind.

Matt

This is some fucked up shit. This is art? I am not going to go into this right now.

Yes, http://www.xxl-cash.com seems approved by ASACP and it is billed by CCBill. That's why I have listed their program at FHGStore.com. However if they are really involved into this shit, I'm going to remove their program ASAP. The only one thing is not clear for now. Is the mentioned CP-site REALLY belongs to xxl-cash.com, so somebody just used their info to registed the domain. I wanna see the explanation from xxl-cahs right here! :mad:

Ukraine is NOT Russia, as well as Columbia is NOT the USA.

Why Do you think that xxl-cash is underage site ?
I just sighned all models look legal ...
also I have seen there fhg at all big sites youngerbabes for example ....and see galleries with there content at al4a.com, thehun .....

i would like to see their explanation as well ... :mad:

nobody said that the xxl-cash sites are underage. they just seem to own "nude underage" sites as well ... :mad:

Another nazi moron here??? http://www.gofuckyourself.com/images...es/NEW/321.gif