ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2016 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Monday, December 28, 2015

Clarke and the criminal connections

Leo is rather dubious about the evidence concerning certain of Arthur C. Clarke's supposed idiosyncracies:
Still, a lack of accusations gives us nothing but rumors to work with. Did he associate with anyone later credibly so accused? That would be evidence for me.
Fair enough. It's not like I know anything about it, although the false claims of his being cleared by the Sri Lankan authorities do tend to make me a little suspicious. Let's see what is out there. Here is what there is from the 1998 Mirror piece based on the reporter who was sent from the UK to Sri Lanka to interview Clarke.
Sitting in a room he calls his Ego Chamber, Arthur C. Clarke  finally admitted his lifelong secret – not only is he gay but he prefers sex with beach boys. Clarke gives the name Ego Chamber to the study in his Colombo home because the walls are lined with his books and framed photos of himself with celebrities from the Pope to Princess Diana. The room has state-of-the-art computers, satellite TV, video recorders and other hi-tech gadgets which Clarke boasts he uses to communicate with pals at the Pentagon.

When we asked Clarke about suggestions that he may have been one of the original pioneers of sex tourism in Sri Lanka he gave a wry smile and said: “I am more amused than disgusted that anyone should think that. I am all in favour of efforts to stop it. But how do we stop it without interfering with the rights of responsible adults.”

Then he repeated a phrase often used by paedophiles: “I think most of the damage comes from the fuss made by hysterical parents afterwards. If the kids don’t mind, fair enough.”

In recent years Clarke’s name has been linked with two notorious paedophiles, one of whom – a Swiss millionaire – was kicked out of Sri Lanka on the orders of the president for abusing impoverished beach boys. He is now awaiting trial in Zurich accused of sexually abusing up to 1,500 young boys and like Clarke was friends with a lot of Sri Lanka’s top politicians, senior policemen and influential government figures.

Clarke is said to have attended parties at the tycoon’s home. When asked if he had, Clarke replied:

“I may well have done. I mean the very first man I met here in 1954 was a paedophile and made no bones about it. He was in intelligence in the army, a fantastic guy.”

Clarke said of his sexual preferences:

“Here it would embarrass everyone right up to the president. I mean, I am chancellor of the university, a public figure, that is the problem so I would be swallowed alive. I would probably be outed, you see.”

These days the frail, white-haired old man gets around with the aid of a wheelchair and crutches following a polio attack 15 years ago.

But Clarke’s fading health does not stop him enjoying his favourite pastime – playing table tennis with schoolboys at a notorious pick-up haunt for perverts called the Otters Aquatic Club. Crumbling and in need of a coat of paint, the Otters is a meeting point for Westerners who lust after young boys. Those who hang around its games room, pool and tennis courts are perfect prey and are easily persuaded to sell themselves for 1,000 rupees (pounds 10) – a small fortune to them.

Clarke goes there regularly in the afternoon, hobbling on a walking stick, to challenge boys – some as young as 12 – to a game of ping pong.

Asked what his definition for paedophilia was Clarke said:

“There are two different definitions, anyone who interferes with young boys who are not old enough to know their own minds and that’s my definition. It varies for me.”

Asked how he knew whether the boys really did know their own minds as he had not known them for long, he said:

“Because pure and simply they looked reasonably mature. Mature enough for me.”

Told one of them was just 13, he said: “If he really was 13 he will be a very mature 13.”

Asked if he thought that was morally wrong he replied: “No.”

Told that some of the boys had told us they would not have had sex if he had not given them money he said: “I’m sure. But I didn’t make anyone do anything they didn’t enjoy doing.”
Of course, one has to ask why a reporter would fly from the UK to Sri Lanka to interview an old man about his predilections unless he already knew what he would find. There is also more highly specific information from what appears to be a British conspiracy site:

US detectives, who arrested leaders of NAMBLA 10 years ago, say Clarke was named by other paedophiles they quizzed during an FBI investigation. The perverts had set up children’s homes in Thailand as fronts for their sick activities.

One of its leaders was Jonathan Tampico, 48, a top nuclear scientist who worked for the American Government. He served two-and-a- half years in jail for molesting a boy of 12 and is now on the run with a million-dollar warrant on his head for further porn offences. He told detectives he had stayed at Clarke’s home in Colombo and had swapped letters with the author.

Another known paedophile, former church minister John Wakefield Cummings, 56, is serving a 24-years-to-life sentence after admitting molesting 17 boys in his care.

He told police in Sacramento, California, that Clarke had been contacted at his Sri Lankan home by a paedophile who was on the run from the American authorities.

In a sworn statement made to an investigator for Sacremento’s district attorney, Wakefield Cummings told how the pervert fled to Sri Lanka where he was able to contact the paedophile community through Clarke. He then fled from Sri Lanka to Indonesia.

Detectives contacted a child welfare group to warn them about Clarke’s activities.

A senior Sacramento detective said: “We never had any reason to take action against Arthur C. Clarke because he was outside our jurisdiction.

“But Clarke’s name did keep coming up. We were looking into members of The Boy Lovers Association who all seemed to know or be aware of him. He ended up connecting to a lot of people we were investigating. Tampico was one of those who said he went to Sri Lanka. I have seen letters between him and Arthur C. Clarke. There was nothing overtly sexual in them but they were clearly corresponding.”

He added: “Cummings told us in the course of interviews that Arthur C. Clarke is a paedophile. He said Sri Lanka used to be a popular destination for the paedophiles. But then the government changed and they were all thrown out. He said Clarke was one of the few they didn’t expel because of his status.”

Ron O’Grady, of ECPAT confirmed he had been warned about Clarke by police in Sacramento.
Now, I know nothing about any of this so I can't vouch for any of it, but it's easy enough to confirm that at least the names are real. Here are public court documents relating to the arrest of the aforementioned Jonathan Tampico. Notice that he and his three fellow defendants are members of NAMBLA, the organization that published the newsletter to which Samuel Delaney admits subscribing. And John Wakefield Cummings is on the registered sex offender list in Clovis, California. Ron O'Grady, who died last year, was a New Zealand minister who founded EPCAT.

Perhaps Mr. Cummings was lying about Mr. Clarke. Perhaps Mr. Tampico was lying about Mr. Clarke. Perhaps Rev. O'Grady was lying about Mr. Clarke. Perhaps all these people from around the world were lying about Mr. Clarke in their discussions with the Sacramento police. But why? Why would his name even come up in the first place?

The Otter Aquatic Club also exists and you can even visit its website. Otter Aquatic Club is one of leading sport promoting club has been in existence for the past 78 years and it is one of the largest and most patronized clubs in Sri Lanka.

And then consider how many obvious signs there were about Clarke compared to how much evidence there was about Marion Zimmer Bradley prior to the revelations of last year. A lot of these people are still alive; some of the detectives involved may even still be on the Sacramento police force.

I have absolutely nothing against Arthur C. Clarke. I enjoyed several of his novels. I was delighted to republish the excellent story he wrote for There Will Be War Volume II, “Superiority”. But the truth is what it is. History is what it is. This world is fallen and Clarke would hardly be the first brilliant man of talent to hide a terrible secret.

The question is, will the science fiction world investigate the matter and face the truth, whatever it might be, or will it continue to avert its eyes and permit the monsters in its midst to operate with impunity? Remember, this is a community that awarded Samuel Delaney its highest honor just last year.

Labels: , ,

94 Comments:

Blogger White Knight Leo #0368 December 28, 2015 4:58 PM  

Then he repeated a phrase often used by paedophiles: “I think most of the damage comes from the fuss made by hysterical parents afterwards. If the kids don’t mind, fair enough.”

In recent years Clarke’s name has been linked with two notorious paedophiles, one of whom – a Swiss millionaire – was kicked out of Sri Lanka on the orders of the president for abusing impoverished beach boys. He is now awaiting trial in Zurich accused of sexually abusing up to 1,500 young boys and like Clarke was friends with a lot of Sri Lanka’s top politicians, senior policemen and influential government figures.


Clarke is said to have attended parties at the tycoon’s home. When asked if he had, Clarke replied:

“I may well have done. I mean the very first man I met here in 1954 was a paedophile and made no bones about it. He was in intelligence in the army, a fantastic guy.”


Okay, that's pretty damning, to say the least. Simultaneously describing a man as a paedophile AND as "fantastic" is bad enough, but the rest of it really goes the distance for me.

Barring exonerating evidence (or revelations that the above is all false), I'm willing to put Clarke into the category of "enabler, possible abuser".

I've got no great love for Clarke; I don't think I've ever read anything of his. So this isn't my world being shattered here. But this looks really, really bad to me.

Anonymous KoranBurningFaggot December 28, 2015 5:09 PM  

So underage boy sex runs about $15 in Sri Lanka but how much does bribing officials to look the other way cost? If a College vice president was having sex parties at his house with girl students too young to go out to bars Leftists would go after him, but make it gay and its OK.

Blogger Nate December 28, 2015 5:10 PM  

I mean how are these beach boys supposed to turn some old pervert in? which of the 1000s of old perverts are they gonna complain about?

Blogger Nate December 28, 2015 5:12 PM  

"If a College vice president was having sex parties at his house with girl students too young to go out to bars Leftists would go after him, but make it gay and its OK."

that's why the perverts work so hard to surround themselves with people like them. They build circles of other perverts all around them so no one can rat them out because they are all in on it as well.

This ironically may be what makes them eventually confess. Because they have been surrounded by perverts so long, they forget that almost the whole world is revolted by them.

Blogger Happy Housewife December 28, 2015 5:14 PM  

"I think most of the damage comes from the fuss made by hysterical parents afterwards. If the kids don’t mind, fair enough.”

As the parent of two little ones, I'd say "hysterical"is far too weak a word.

Murderous would be more apt. Filthy pervert.

Blogger Noah B #120 December 28, 2015 5:15 PM  

"If a College vice president was having sex parties at his house with girl students too young to go out to bars Leftists would go after him, but make it gay and its OK."

Yep. Promiscuous sex with young women above the age of consent reeks of normalcy to leftists.

Blogger Conan the Cimmerian December 28, 2015 5:17 PM  

Kratman is right, crucifixion is a good answer to these problems.

Blogger Ostar December 28, 2015 5:33 PM  

Heterosexual men don't seem to have this issue of abusing underage girls, except as reprehensible outliers.

Why is it then that in homosexual men, attraction to underage boys is so prevalent, with entire organizations devoted to promoting it and protecting the abusers? Is it because so many of them were abused themselves as children, or something else?

Blogger Student in Blue December 28, 2015 5:41 PM  

These densely-packed, truth-laden bombs of dialectically solid posts you and Daniel have been making are phenomenal for rhetoric. God bless both of you for these necessary, yet necessarily ugly, posts.

Anonymous Mike December 28, 2015 5:41 PM  

From the War Nerd, one of the best-informed researchers on the net:

a few years back, when he was too senile and drunk to watch his tongue, Clarke admitted in an interview that the whole reason he moved to Sri Lanka is “for the boys.” As in, he liked to rape little boys, and they were cheap and pretty in the dear old ex-colony.

Blogger dc.sunsets December 28, 2015 5:50 PM  

that's why the perverts work so hard to surround themselves with people like them. They build circles of other perverts all around them so no one can rat them out because they are all in on it as well.

Barney Frank.

What does this tell us about Congress?

Anonymous RedJack #22 December 28, 2015 5:50 PM  

I once dated a young woman who used to write screen plays for... Well let's just say she worked in Hollywood (she is now out of that field, and I don't want to get her into any issues).

She left because she didn't know any non gay men in her field. That and the casting couch was dual acting.

She said this is also why no one seems to be able to write a functioning relationship in Hollywood.

The older I get, the more I realize that most of what is called pop culture is a way to get gay men and women access to their next underage victim.

Anonymous zen0 the Ephemeral December 28, 2015 5:51 PM  

@8 ...or something else?"


Wickedness

Anonymous Scintan December 28, 2015 5:58 PM  

Yep. Promiscuous sex with young women above the age of consent reeks of normalcy to leftists.

The age of consent is mostly nonsensical, because it's not based on anything particularly real. Wanting to bang hot young women (or men) is a perfectly normal, and biologically driven, desire.

Until we fix how we define this stuff for purposes of law, we will always catch innocents in the net while wasting resources that could have been spent hunting down the true monsters.

Blogger rcocean December 28, 2015 5:58 PM  

I can see why sex with 12 year old boys is wrong morally - for the religious. But if you're an atheist, what's the problem? I'd say the same is true of slavery.

Anonymous KoranBurningFaggot December 28, 2015 6:00 PM  

Yep. Promiscuous sex with young women above the age of consent reeks of normalcy to leftists.

In a STR8 version of it, it would be women not old enough to drink having sex/booze/drug parties at their college vice presidents house. Then used the college vice president as a reference to get into backlogged programs.

Why is it then that in homosexual men, attraction to underage boys is so prevalent

A 30yo with an apartment that smells of ignored litterbox & pot can be the life of the underage party scene for the cost of some booze and drugs. While not as bad as Hogg, I was surprised at the number of people that unfriended me when they thought I narced him out, but only his roommate(who was on probation for sexually assaulting a minor in a McDonalds)went to jail.

Blogger Nate December 28, 2015 6:01 PM  

"I can see why sex with 12 year old boys is wrong morally - for the religious. But if you're an atheist, what's the problem? I'd say the same is true of slavery."


***blink***

Blogger Cecil Henry December 28, 2015 6:02 PM  

"I think most of the damage comes from the fuss made by hysterical parents afterwards. If the kids don’t mind, fair enough.”

Good Lord that's a damning statement right there, and an admission that pedophilia is fine.

Very disturbing.

But you have to always wonder--- so why NOW, and who benefits from this revelation NOW?????

Surely it was more useful to a blackmailer 30 years ago.

Blogger Kallmunz December 28, 2015 6:03 PM  

Wow, just Wow. Reading this guy is a lot like reading Scalzi, perhaps not guilty but he goes overboard to prove his case.

Blogger Nate December 28, 2015 6:03 PM  

"Why is it then that in homosexual men, attraction to underage boys is so prevalent, with entire organizations devoted to promoting it and protecting the abusers? "

Exactly where do you think homosexual men come from son?

The vast majority of homosexuals are created. Not born. That's why they push the "born that way" mantra so hard. Because they don't want anyone digging to deeply into the actual root cause.

Otherwise there would a purge that would leave Sodom pitying the poor gays of today.

Blogger Nate December 28, 2015 6:05 PM  

zimmerman bradley had a deeply held belief that a homosexual utopia could be created if all hetros were just converted.

Anonymous KoranBurningFaggot December 28, 2015 6:06 PM  

I can see why sex with 12 year old boys is wrong morally - for the religious.

For moslems its only boys with no body hair that its ok to have sex with(bacha-bazi), but if you say you love an adult man its off the rooftop you go. That's why Anderson Cooper says such nice things about moslem nations, he would never say the latter and the former only costs ~$15 based on the previous post.

Blogger Ignatius P. Garnet December 28, 2015 6:07 PM  

Sodomites don't get pregnant so they see no reason why the age of consent should be the same as it is for women.

2016 Prediction: They will agitate to lower it; the feminists will scream 'inequality' - some feminists will demand that the female age be lowered as well; other feminists will see this as serving up more victims for the patriarchy (all men are rapists, remember) and war breaks out among the Left over whether to keep the consent laws where they are. In the confrontation between sodomites and feminists, women have the advantage of numbers, but sodomites have a TyranoSoros Rex to back them.

It may be a rare occasion where some feminists see the light and find common cause with Christians against the sodomite horde.

Meanwhile, as evangelical Protestants and traditionalist Catholics find themselves sharing common cause with the 'all men are rapists' feminists (dressed as Amazon Wonder Women), Emperor Francidious is over in the Vatican, rubbing his hands with glee, exclaiming 'Who am I to judge?' as he ushers in the Year of Mercy with an adolescent choir boy.

Blogger TS December 28, 2015 6:09 PM  

@3 "I mean how are these beach boys supposed to turn some old pervert in? which of the 1000s of old perverts are they gonna complain about?" Then why didn't any English boys turn on Clarke after he was buried? They certainly didn't have any problem turning on Jimmy Saville...

Anonymous Ain December 28, 2015 6:20 PM  

Feminist aren't actually for supporting females. They're for destroying western culture.

Blogger Steve, the Dark Ninja of Mockery December 28, 2015 6:27 PM  

There was this strange interview with Clarke in the Guardian in 1999:

I took a tuk-tuk to Sir Arthur C Clarke's house. The motorbike-taxi weaved through the monsoon-rutted dirt roads of Sri Lanka's capital, past oxen carts and re-reconditioned Hondas and old men swerving on knackered bicycles, past women at the side of the road drying leaves and dyeing cloth and men pimping massages ('Nice girls, nice boys'), past teenage soldiers toying with machine guns, and barefoot children flying kites, and shacks selling tyres and Cokes and mangoes. Colombo looks more like a city out of Mad Max than 2001.

Yet, allegedly, Clarke lived in this third world shithole because he loved... scuba diving. Hmmm.

Interesting notes on the influence Clarke held in Sri Lanka:

Arthur Clarke, of Minehead, Somerset, now 82, has long enjoyed a special status in Sri Lanka. The island nation's only celebrity expatriate lives, as he says, the life of a failed recluse. He is accorded unique tax-free status by a government permanently sandbagged against terrorism ('After all,' he argues later, with characteristic humility, 'I bring in millions, just from visitors, friends, TV crews and so on'). He is chancellor of Colombo's university and director of a new technology park; a bronze bust of him stands in the foyer of the old colonial Galle Face hotel.

The article doesn't say, but Clarke was also a personal friend of the Sri Lankan president. It's fair to say that he was eminently well-placed to make unpleasant allegations go away.

Then there's this oddness:

I had read somewhere that he used to keep a journal, I ask him if he would ever consider publishing it .

'I used to keep a journal from, I guess, the Thirties,' he admits. 'There are volumes and volumes of it which are all in the Clarkives now. They are,' he adds, oddly, 'to be sealed up for 30 years after my death'.

Why on earth are they sealed up?

'Well,' he says, 'there might be all sorts of embarrassing things in them'.

What kind of things?

He doesn't answer.


Doesn't sound good, does it?

A curious exchange then follows I ask him if he was damaged by the allegations on the front page of the Sunday Mirror from last March, which accused him of 'paying for sex with young boys'. 'Oh,' Clarke says understatedly, 'that was very unpleasant, of course, and luckily there was no problem whatsoever I immediately got the police in, and they disproved the whole damn thing'.

Are you suing the Mirror?

'Well,' he says, 'that's why I don't want to talk about it'.


Clarke then goes on to blow smoke up the interviewer's arse by distracting him with talk of his powerful and famous friends - Rupert Murdoch especially - before the journo can get back on topic:

So, is he going to sue the Mirror?

'I'm waiting to decide whether to sue'.

But he must want to clear his name?

'Well,' he answers, 'I'm 82'.


We know now that he never did sue the Mirror. If indeed their allegations had been disproved as he claimed, it would have been trivially easy for a man of his means to instruct a London-based libel specialist to sue the pants off them. Being 82 seems a strange reason to desist from aggressively defending one's reputation and legacy against one of the most vile accusations imaginable.

None of this is proof of anything, but it looks dodgier than Phil Sandifer stocking up on rohypnol and candy for Halloween.

Blogger Ostar December 28, 2015 6:31 PM  

@20 Exactly where do you think homosexual men come from son?

I'm aware of that.
I was hoping some of our homosexual commenters here had an insight on the topic, but I should have asked them directly I guess.

Anonymous 334 December 28, 2015 6:41 PM  

That's about as clear a confession as I ever care to hear. Defending Clarke after that interview is burying one's head in the sand.

Blogger RobertT December 28, 2015 6:43 PM  

Typical pedo. Part of him knows he'd better keep quiet, another part wants to brag.

Anonymous WillBest December 28, 2015 6:46 PM  

I don't know how fast the UK courts are, but that sort of libel suit in the US would easily take 2-4 years, and the paper would be able to go through all his journals, dispose his friends, and help, etc. Unlike criminal proceedings there is no 5th amendment protections in a civil suit.

Being 82 and having to give a tabloid access to your journals in discovery is reason enough to not go after it, if you had been "cleared" by the police.

Anonymous ? December 28, 2015 6:53 PM  

Can BGS shed some light on the "made not born" issue?

Anonymous KoranBurningFaggot December 28, 2015 6:59 PM  

I was hoping some of our homosexual commenters here had an insight on the topic

I think its just me that's on the right side. A lot of gay guys had been abused but not all. A big part of the lefts push in common core is to get kids to think gay sex is ok to get more to try it. Obviously there are some people who like it, while some didn't discover it until they where drunk down by the railroad tracks with my one ex.

Generals disobey bath house barry over Syria

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2015/12/no_author/generals-disobey-warmongering-president/

Blogger Zimri December 28, 2015 7:00 PM  

rcocean - slavery is just nonrepresentative government, and - as was the Torah, and Jesus - I'm completely fine with it. That said there are things you don't even do to your slaves.

Blogger VD December 28, 2015 7:07 PM  

Then why didn't any English boys turn on Clarke after he was buried?

Because Clarke lived in Sri Lanka from 1956 until 2008.

Blogger VD December 28, 2015 7:08 PM  

'Oh,' Clarke says understatedly, 'that was very unpleasant, of course, and luckily there was no problem whatsoever I immediately got the police in, and they disproved the whole damn thing'.

He lied. They did nothing of the sort.

Blogger Emmett Fitz-Hume December 28, 2015 7:10 PM  

Does anyone know, has there been any reaction by the SJW/Truefan axis to Daniels's Safe Space series?

Anonymous Victor F. Michaelson December 28, 2015 7:12 PM  

We need a War on Paedophilia. Issued Letters of Marquie that both protect the bearers from civil suits and entitle the bearers to the possessions of their targets would end the problem at minimal cost to the taxpayers.

Blogger VD December 28, 2015 7:24 PM  

Does anyone know, has there been any reaction by the SJW/Truefan axis to Daniels's Safe Space series?

First they tried to claim it was just an unfair slam on John Scalzi. Then they tried to make a relative comparison with Sad Puppies, until someone pointed out to them that voting in a literary award is not exactly tantamount to child molesting.

And then they were silent.

Blogger Steve, the Dark Ninja of Mockery December 28, 2015 7:24 PM  

WillBest - He may have feared disclosure of his private diaries, which only makes one wonder what he wrote in there.

But, on the face of it, it would have been a simple case. The Mirror didn't make vague claims about Arthur C Clarke being a sexual predator, they made specific claims that he admitted to paying boys for sex.

Either Clarke made those statements, or he didn't.

The burden of proof for defamation cases in English courts is on the defendant. So the Mirror would have had to prove that it accurately reported what Clarke told them.

If a tape of the interview failed to turn up in court, it seems unlikely a judge would have granted a disclosure order against Clarke.

Blogger Cataline Sergius December 28, 2015 7:33 PM  

Not surprising in Clarke's case. He came up in the old English "Public School" system.

Among it's other practices, the younger boys were required to serve the older boys. To include hauling up firewood.

This practice was called, fagging.

Blogger Noah B #120 December 28, 2015 7:35 PM  

In part 1 of the series Daniel mentions that Rupert Murdoch was a close friend of Arthur C. Clarke and likely helped suppress the Sunday Mirror article.

Anonymous Ahmad ibn Fadhlan December 28, 2015 7:35 PM  

@12: "I can see why sex with 12 year old boys is wrong morally - for the religious. But if you're an atheist, what's the problem? I'd say the same is true of slavery."

I get Nate's *blink* reaction in @17. I think the last sentence about slavery indicates that it's an intended shot at atheism, as something that leads to both slavery and child exploitation via relativism. Ockham's Razor suggests that it's unlikely to be an attempted defense of paedophilia and slavery both.

I'll add that when there's confusion over a subject like this one, it's a good idea for the author of said confusion to correct it and explain the intended argument.

@38. Ah, yes. Displace, divert, disappear. The Leftist trinity in more ways than one, unfortunately.

Blogger Margaret Man December 28, 2015 7:56 PM  

I stand corrected. In an earlier post, I commented that the evidence looked like Clarke didn't belong on the list. Looks like he does.

Blogger Neanderserk December 28, 2015 8:14 PM  

The connection between pedophiles and rabbits is that Beatles bunny-ears symbol they all love so much: The peace sign.

Blogger rcocean December 28, 2015 8:20 PM  

"I think the last sentence about slavery indicates that it's an intended shot at atheism, as something that leads to both slavery and child exploitation via relativism."

Excellent. You get an A+ for reading comprehension.

Blogger 1337kestrel December 28, 2015 8:24 PM  

Somewhere in Castalia's secret underground lair, there is a wall of newspaper clippings connected by red yarn, with thumbtacks through the skulls of Walter, Marion, Arthur...

Blogger takirks December 28, 2015 8:58 PM  

FWIW, the first time I heard anything about Clarke's predilections was from a Sri Lankan TCN I struck up a friendship with in Kuwait, circa 2003. Per his statements to me, which took me totally out of the blue, as I'd had no idea at all about this, Clarke was known by the locals to have "issues" with young men and boys going back to the 1970s. He also said that that was the reason he was "in exile" from the UK, as if he went back, they were going to prosecute him. All this was supposedly common knowledge in Sri Lanka, just like the other Westerners who went there for sex with the local kids. It wasn't a big deal, to him--He figured that everyone knew about it, and was interested to hear how big a deal it was to people like me. From what he'd seen, that's just what Westerners do, in Sri Lanka and other like countries. The idea that someone like Clarke would become a pariah overnight, were it common knowledge? Shocking, to him.

Not that he approved--He just thought that was how we did things. Subject came up when we were talking about how we'd been raised. His assumption was that pederasty was so common in the West that everyone did it... After all, that's what they see of us: The sex tourists coming to screw little boys.

Anonymous Laz December 28, 2015 8:58 PM  

@7. Conan the Cimmerian "Kratman is right, crucifixion is a good answer to these problems."

Nothing like a public execution to make the pervs cringe and slink away.

Blogger Ron Van Wegen December 28, 2015 9:20 PM  

At 23 Ignatius P. Garnet wrote:

"Emperor Francidious is over in the Vatican, rubbing his hands with glee, exclaiming 'Who am I to judge?' as he ushers in the Year of Mercy with an adolescent choir boy."

You have just accused the Catholic Pope of pedophilia (actually "ephebophilia" but who cares right?) I'll leave the childish term "Emperor Francidious" for another day.

Do you have evidence of these crimes you accuse the Holy Father of committing? I thought not. It's simply guilt by association. Some priests and religious are evil so you accuse the Pope of being evil also. (For what it's worth, there are more "pedophiles" (the correct term is "sexual abusers") in the American education system alone than there are in the entire Catholic Church - read the report by the researcher Ms Shakeshaft).

For what appears to be a cheap bigoted point you claim a good and holy man man "gleefully" sodomizes young boys and brags about it to the press and the world.

As regards the oft-repeated quote: "Who am I to judge?", this is poorly expressed Catholic moral teaching. We do not judge people. But we do judge acts. Homosexual acts are "intrinsically disordered" and are judged morally wrong therefore. Those who engage in such acts may or may not be guilty of sin.

It is not up to us to judge people (which is what the Pope was saying). However, objectively, acts are still either right or wrong. A young boy abused his entire life by the likes of Clarke et al. may have no responsibility for his actions at all and would enter Heaven at the moment of his death for all we know. But the acts remains evil in themselves. And not simply because of age. That "merely" compounds the evil. Similarly, we do not even judge Clarke. Personal responsibility for sin (the "judgement" the Holy Father is referring to) is decided by God alone.

It serves the purposes of the press, homosexual lobbyists and others inimical to the constant teaching of the Catholic Church to continue to "misunderstand" what the Holy Father was in fact saying.

Please rethink the way you express your hatred for the evil done by evil men. Accusing innocent people of vicious crimes is not the way to bring about the world you desire.

As regards the "Year of Mercy" you alluded to, you might also care to consider what that means. In that spirit, I already forgive you and hope we can be friends! (I'm kidding, you're on my "Naughty List" for next Christmas. No soup for you!)

Blogger Neanderserk December 28, 2015 9:35 PM  

^ God hates fags.

Blogger Sherwood family December 28, 2015 10:47 PM  

Is it just me or is there something particularly creepy/eerily appropriate about the fact that Clarke titled one of his more famous works "Childhood's End." It would seem to me that if Clarke were indeed involved in pederasty that he was in a singular position to bring a great number of childhoods to an end; a sad and loathsome end to what should be a time of innocence. This series of Daniel's convinces me that there are not nearly enough millstones around these days to deal with this kind of thing.

Blogger TS December 28, 2015 10:49 PM  

@34 - ???. What does that have to do with anything? He was 39 (or thereabouts) when he moved to Sri Lanka. You're saying that he only had sex with Sri Lankan boys?

@44 - This is the bunny ears I believe you're referring to.

Blogger TS December 28, 2015 10:51 PM  

This

Blogger Ignatius P. Garnet December 28, 2015 10:58 PM  

at 49 Rob Van Wagen - you accuse me of making a calumnious minor-ity report against Francidious. Not guilty, I protest, of all but putting the dick in prediction for 2016. I am not a pre cog. so contrary to your accusation, I cannot 'accuse' Francidious of anything. Who he chooses to ring in the Year of Mercy will be his own business...and who says that a Pope and a choir boy cannot just be friends?

Blogger praetorian December 28, 2015 11:03 PM  

OT, econ-autiste edition:

Today I learned that Irving Fisher had a plan in 1936 to move the banks to a 100% reserved system and eliminate duration-mismatch fraud/introduction of multiple time-monetary unit claims/fractional reserving.

What a huge step forward that would have been! Despite a minor in Econ in undergrad at Cal, reading loads of Chicago School, Austrian and Steve Keens stuff, I had never heard about this. Had any of the ilk? Does anyone know how this got memory-holed? Or am I just ignorant?

Here's a recent IMF paper on the topic:

https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/wp/2012/wp12202.pdf

I'm reading it now. Riveting stuff.

Blogger kurt9 December 28, 2015 11:04 PM  

You know what they say about ducks.

If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck....

Blogger praetorian December 29, 2015 12:06 AM  

OT, econ-autiste edition:

Ah, fuck. Reading more on the paper, it looks like it isn't offering something sane, like simply forcing banks to prove they are not committing fraud by promising monetary units to multiple people at the same moment, but rather a scheme to force all credit growth through treasury issuance. No wonder the Austrians went ape shit on it.

The paper unfortunately very rapidly devolves into impenetrable mathematics...

Blogger 1337kestrel December 29, 2015 12:12 AM  

If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck....

...someone is writing fowlkin romances about it?

Blogger Neanderserk December 29, 2015 12:52 AM  

If you would like something more lively on the evils of ethnic banking, there's always this.

Blogger rho December 29, 2015 1:19 AM  

He is now awaiting trial in Zurich accused of sexually abusing up to 1,500 young boys and like Clarke was friends with a lot of Sri Lanka’s top politicians, senior policemen and influential government figures.

1,500? That's a weirdly high number. If there wasn't some kind of bandwagoning going on, the churn rate for "beach boys" must be astronomical. Coming from the Mirror, it's either true enough to print or disprovable libel, which are kinda the same thing.

In any event, thanks a lot, Arthur C. Clarke, for turning my go-to exasperation phrase--"screw all this, and screw y'all, I'm moving to Sri Lanka"--into a de facto admission of pedo tendencies.

Blogger Rusty Fife December 29, 2015 2:21 AM  

@59

Buried in your link is this little gem of Biblical support for import/export taxes as the sole source of government incone:

Matthew 17:24-26New International Version (NIV)The Temple Tax

24 After Jesus and his disciples arrived in Capernaum, the collectors of the two-drachma came to Peter and asked, “Doesn’t your teacher pay the temple tax?”

25 “Yes, he does,” he replied.

When Peter came into the house, Jesus was the first to speak. “What do you think, Simon?” he asked. “From whom do the kings of the earth collect duty and taxes; from their own children or from others?”

26 “From others,” Peter answered.

“Then the children are exempt,” Jesus said to him.

Blogger Ron December 29, 2015 2:21 AM  

@Ignatius P. Garnet

Oh you are bad.

The was horrible, and hillarious.

Blogger Rusty Fife December 29, 2015 2:43 AM  

@59

OT more good bible quotes:

"They shall not dwell in thy land, lest they make thee sin against me." (1 Kings 4:21‑24) "Receive a stranger into thine house, and he will disturb thee, and turn thee out of thine own." (Ecclesiasticus 2, 11:34)

Blogger Giuseppe The Kurgan December 29, 2015 2:56 AM  

I agree with Sherwood.
Millstones. Millstones for the lot of them.

Anonymous Susan December 29, 2015 3:10 AM  

Semi OT: Psychiatrist Dr. Robert Spitzer, the man responsible for the removal of homosexuality as a mental disease from the medical texts died this week. May he rot in a very hot place for his contribution to the rot in our country.

Blogger MycroftJones December 29, 2015 3:12 AM  

I have a friend who told me these allegations about Arthur C Clarke more than 15 years ago. He was physically in Sri Lanka with Arthur C Clarke for a length of time. He witnessed Arthur staring lustfully at little boys and ignoring women. He witnessed Sri Lankan adults running to "fetch" whichever boy had caught Sir Arthurs attention. Etc. Eye witness. Someone I trust.

Blogger rho December 29, 2015 4:01 AM  

I have a friend who told me these allegations about Arthur C Clarke more than 15 years ago. He was physically in Sri Lanka with Arthur C Clarke for a length of time. He witnessed Arthur staring lustfully at little boys and ignoring women. He witnessed Sri Lankan adults running to "fetch" whichever boy had caught Sir Arthurs attention. Etc. Eye witness. Someone I trust.

To whom did you report this?

Blogger VD December 29, 2015 4:09 AM  

I have a friend who told me these allegations about Arthur C Clarke more than 15 years ago. He was physically in Sri Lanka with Arthur C Clarke for a length of time.

Ask your friend if he's willing to have Daniel get in touch with him.

Blogger Emmett Fitz-Hume December 29, 2015 4:41 AM  

@67

????

I'm guessing MycroftJones doesn't live in Sri Lanka, so couldn't report it to authorities there. Are you assuming MycroftJones is Sri Lankan? Are you treating this like a criminal action in the United States?

I can only speak for myself, but I don't need to prove beyond a reasonable doubt in my own mind regarding who or what I associate with. That's not my burden. I've read the articles and the links. My standard of proof has been met for the purpose of never, ever, ever allow my children near an individual who makes frequent trips to Sri Lanka (or Thailand, for that matter.)

My standard of proof has also been met for those trying to bury their heads in the sand saying, "la-la-la-la, there's no proof! No proof! La-la-la!"

Blogger rho December 29, 2015 4:44 AM  

I can only speak for myself

And yet, you deign to speak for others.

Blogger VD December 29, 2015 4:47 AM  

To whom did you report this?

Why would someone report second-hand evidence about someone in a different country? Why are you apparently attempting to play the role of defense attorney?

Don't be passive-aggressive. If you intend to accuse Mycroft or his friend of lying, simply do so.

Blogger Emmett Fitz-Hume December 29, 2015 4:57 AM  

@70

VD nailed it. I won't engage further.

Blogger rho December 29, 2015 4:59 AM  

Why would someone report second-hand evidence about someone in a different country? Why are you apparently attempting to play the role of defense attorney?

Mycroft's 15-year-old personal evidence is at least as notable as a Mirror article from 1998.

Blogger sapopular December 29, 2015 5:25 AM  

What's the fun in making a villainy if anyone knows?

It is very clear that Arthur C. Clarke ALLOWED this case became public. Simply because he wanted it.

Clarke managed to rub in society face his filthy past for fun. He has little to fear or lose. Is a gay man of position, wealth, status and age. And always can claim senility.

His confession in a mainstream newspaper only taught a new tourist destination for asleep pedophiles around the world.

Blogger VD December 29, 2015 6:36 AM  

Mycroft's 15-year-old personal evidence is at least as notable as a Mirror article from 1998.

I graduated from high school more than 15 years ago. The fact that something happened 15 years ago doesn't mean that one cannot remember it, or accurately testify to it.

You didn't answer the question. Why are you assuming a defensive posture rather than approaching the subject with an open mind?

Blogger MycroftJones December 29, 2015 6:52 AM  

Vox, I'll ask him. Presumably "Daniel" is the author of the blog series you've been linking to Safe Room/Rape Room?

Blogger MycroftJones December 29, 2015 6:52 AM  

And a quick google pulls up the name of Daniel Enness. Ok. I'm way too tired to be using a keyboard.

Blogger MycroftJones December 29, 2015 7:09 AM  

Pedophile shaming isn't working like it used to. Even hard men don't dare touch pedophiles. In jail, they are a protected and privileged class. The TV myth of jail is far from reality. Society has changed.

Blogger MycroftJones December 29, 2015 7:15 AM  

10 years ago, Ralph Rene (now deceased) told me stories about attending parties with Isaac Asimov. He almost beat Isaac up, said he had to keep him away from the young girls. I assumed at the time he was referring to young women. After reading about his son, and all the other sci-fi figures, I wonder.

Blogger MycroftJones December 29, 2015 7:17 AM  

Rene spoke of Isaac Asimov with disgust, but he'd been a fan before that. And Rene was no shy chicken about sexing up nubile adult women. He must have been talking about underage girls.

Blogger 1337kestrel December 29, 2015 9:13 AM  

Even hard men don't dare touch pedophiles. In jail, they are a protected and privileged class.

Maybe in jail. Post sentencing, in most prisons, there is significantly less protective custody.

Blogger Chris Nelson December 29, 2015 10:28 AM  

"10 years ago, Ralph Rene (now deceased) told me stories about attending parties with Isaac Asimov."

Is this the moon-landing hoax theorist and wacky pseudo-science Ralph Rene?

The only substantial rumor I've heard about Asimov is that several cons disinvited him. Supposedly because he was a galactic class a-hole of the nth degree.

There's a joke that the unit of dislike is measured in Asimovs and must difficult jerks are only a few micro-Asimovs.

Anonymous KoranBurningFaggot December 29, 2015 11:04 AM  

1,500? That's a weirdly high number. If there wasn't some kind of bandwagoning going on, the churn rate for "beach boys" must be astronomical.

That works out to one boy a day for a little over 4 years, he lived in Sri lanka for over 50 years, he could have been diddleing the great grandsons of his first beach boys . Since he paid what a pack of cigarettes cost in NYC for each. A pack of moslems raped over 1700 little white girls in Rotherham UK while cops ignored it because they didn't want to be called racist.

To whom did you report this?

Nothing happened to Congressman (D) Menendez after he got caught with 14yo hookers in the Dominican Republic.

The fact that something happened 15 years ago doesn't mean that one cannot remember it, or accurately testify to it

When people talked about how a doctor couldn't remember details about John Kerry trying to get a purple heart for a scratch, I realized there are a few patients I will always remember. The adult military guy allergic to apples that drank a juice with a picture of an apple on it, & other stupid injuries. Undoubtably one of the reasons for the switch from the privacy act to the HIPAA law.

Why are you assuming a defensive posture rather than approaching the subject with an open mind?

He is mad because he paid twice as much for beach boys.

Blogger rho December 29, 2015 11:04 AM  

You didn't answer the question. Why are you assuming a defensive posture rather than approaching the subject with an open mind?

You inferred the posture.

If you were privy to such information, would you sit on it?

Anonymous VFM367 December 29, 2015 11:39 AM  

In the late 70's, I attended school with a young woman whose family had lived in Sri Lanka for several years. Her father was a visiting professor. One day the conversation turned to Science Fiction, and she casually mentioned meeting Clarke. I thought it odd he'd left Great Britain and mentioned the scuba diving. She laughed and said it was well known that he and his partner had a thing for young boys. I was pretty naive - I remember being surprised he was gay, much less a pedophile.

Anonymous KoranBurningFaggot December 29, 2015 11:42 AM  

If you were privy to such information, would you sit on it?

Hey I heard a nigger shot 17 people in Bunny Park playground New Orleans with most of them being minors, at the end of last month. I wonder why the news is sitting on it? If a white guy shot a single 10yo at a playground it would be national news. Who would he report it to, local corrupt officials, his home state LEOS, or the British Embassy? " Pip Pip cheerios ambassador, one of your cuntrymen is buggering beach boys for 10 pounds each"

Blogger VD December 29, 2015 12:33 PM  

If you were privy to such information, would you sit on it?

I'm not sitting on it now. But thousands, perhaps tens of thousands of people did so with regards to Marion Zimmer Bradley, Walter Breen, and Ed Kramer. They are doing it now with regards to Samuel Delany. Why do you think they would not have done so in the case of a famous, well-connected man like Arthur C. Clarke.

Blogger rho December 29, 2015 1:54 PM  

I'm not sitting on it now. But thousands, perhaps tens of thousands of people did so with regards to Marion Zimmer Bradley, Walter Breen, and Ed Kramer.

And, apparently, so did MycroftJones. Or maybe he didn't. I don't know, which is why I asked the question.

It is confusing, though, to suggest that his second hand information isn't actionable while denouncing thousands of others for not acting on their second hand information. Unless the implication is that thousands, or tens of thousands of people had first-hand information?

Blogger Neanderserk December 29, 2015 2:35 PM  

In deference to Rho's IQ:

The bullet train is fine.

Anonymous lr_vfm5411 December 30, 2015 12:20 AM  

Damn. Not as horrid as the stuff from Delaney, but... ugh.

While I was ignorant of the full extent of what some in the fan community were up to, I know I'd long ago tried to read one of the Darkover books by MZB and just couldn't.

Anonymous lr_vfm5411 December 30, 2015 1:23 AM  

Just - ugh. Not as viscerally disgusting as the delaney story quotes, but still disturbing.

Blogger bob k. mando December 30, 2015 1:34 AM  

88. rho December 29, 2015 1:54 PM
It is confusing, though, to suggest that his second hand information isn't actionable while denouncing thousands of others for not acting on their second hand information.



now you're just lying.

the reporter who interviewed Clarke, and whom Clarke failed to sue for libel, was most certainly FIRST HAND.

if, IF Clarke were the only one in the scifi world being accused of pedophilia THEN you might have a point.

but we've got many multiples of people *convicted*, just in the States.


and, concerning the David Asimov problem ...
here's a Marion Zimmer Bradley quote, great humanitarian that she was:
"Bradley on protecting one of her husband’s victims after knowing the abuse was occuring: “Oh, please. The idea of me protecting little [Victim X], good heavens. “"


Asimov despised his son. would Isaac have bothered protecting David from the likes of Breen and Clarke?

Blogger VD December 30, 2015 9:21 AM  

Unless the implication is that thousands, or tens of thousands of people had first-hand information?

Precisely. They did.

Blogger Stephen St. Onge December 31, 2015 6:07 PM  

@33
slavery is just nonrepresentative government, and - as was the Torah, and Jesus - I'm completely fine with it.

        Somehow I missed that passage in the Gospels where Jesus endorses slavery.  Perhaps you could cite it?

Post a Comment

Rules of the blog
Please do not comment as "Anonymous". Comments by "Anonymous" will be spammed.

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts