RE: The British Elites and the Paedophile cover ups.
Your certainty expressed on the first point would be accurate, what an adult does with their own image is their business. But as to your second point I must ask:
Should photos of murdered and mutilated children be part of the public domain? Should they really?
What makes the public entitled to such photos of brutalized minor children being part of the public domain?
Are you a parent? Would you want photos of your murdered and mutilated child being public domain and posted all over the internet?
I can assure you I am not smiling either. I have been well aware of the depths and scope of the wickedness for some years now, and I watch these demon spawn with extreme prejudice. Perhaps I am making some incorrect assumption of the intent of your post to me, but if you think I am your enemy, I find that very odd.
I have no enemies that I'm aware of, nor am I seeking to make any. I was merely curious what your position might be.
As to your question to me. Again, as far as I am aware I am not a parent. I do have friends who are parents though and I'm sure their feelings would be mixed about such a thing. Some for it and some against. I will put it this way: If it is ok to allow images of mutilated lives (human and animal) in public news as well as raising awareness and funds for worthy causes. Then why not in this case?
No offense @annie.oakley but what should be and what is is none of my doing. I know plenty of people who cannot stand to see images of suffering animals yet bat not an eye or spare a heart beat for starving, displaced and yes mutilated innocent children when presented to them. Evidence to me of the mindscaping that has been perpetrated on society since the beginning of the television era.
I'm glad I caught this in my feed just before going to bed. I wouldn't have wanted you to think of me as an enemy for any longer than necessary.
~peace out...in~