Police say they arrested 66-year-old Larry Brinkin, the high-profile gay activist, on possession of child pornography on Friday night.
Brinkin, a community icon who led the fight for the city to recognize same-sex partnerships, was arrested and booked into San Francisco County Jail, police said.
(Update 3:30 p.m.): According to the search warrant, SFPD acted after receiving a tip from the Los Angeles Police Department, which obtained from AOL an e-mail exchange between a Los Angeles user and firstname.lastname@example.org. Police say they linked the AOL address to Brinkin’s IP address; he is owner of the account and paid for AOL service with his credit card.
The warrant claims these e-mails contained images of children as young as perhaps a year old being sodomized by and performing oral sex on adult men. Zack3737@aol.com — whom the police allege is Brinkin — provided graphic commentary on the photos of interracial adult-child sex.
Comments included “I loved especially the ni!!er 2 year old getting nailed. Hope you’ll continue so I can see what the little blond b!tch is going to get. White Power! White Supremacy! White Dick Rules!”
This is what you get when you allow the liberal left to normalize these deviants.
Considering the information above I would not be surprised at all to find this idiot to be Obamas next school czar.
BTW: Look how tolerant this left-wing nut-job is when he doesn't think others are watching. Typical
Harumph #11038 from OHIO says You lefties may not like these posts but
here is a video for you to watch. Everyone should watch.
Liberals have been trying to normalize this crap for years.
Note the speak states that pedophiles don't choose to be the way they are. They are born that way.
Isn't that the same argument they make for homosexuality?
Real simple fix for this. Hollow point to the base of the skull. Problem solved, zero chance to re-offend.
MikeF from FLORIDA says it seems to me they don't care about what happens it's just about who did it
I don't know why there's a space for comments; you can put everything in the subject line.
PJzaBruin (184.108.40.206) from CALIFORNIA says Brink in needs to be locked away, and kept away from kids and computers
And the bassturds who create that kind of porn need to be castrated and deserted on an island off the coast of Iceland, so they can never harm another child. And this bullchit has ZERO connection to politics except for some a-hole named HARUMPH trying to make that connection.
Harumph #11038 from OHIO says Zero connection?
You will only find liberal judges suspending sentences against these beasts because they are:
Just sick and can't help themselves.
Were born that way.
Need rehabilitation and not incarcerations.
All BS, put a phuking bullet in his head and call it a day.
MikeF from FLORIDA says odd connection
The connection some of us see is "people" supporting "alternative lifestyles" as NORMAL and then being surprised by this type of behavior.
Normal is normal no matter what is PC. BTW your answer should be to list someone who is "normal" and does things like this. Our answer will be they are not normal even if they try to cover their behavior in normalcy.
PJzaBruin (220.127.116.11) from CALIFORNIA says WTF, Mike?
Did I not make it clear how I feel about these kiddy-porn producers and consumers?
THEY ARE NOT NORMAL, whether they are Democrats or Republicans, Liberals or Conservatives. Politics is irrelevant to how sick these f#^%ers are.
mac (Doyle McEwen) (18.104.22.168) from CALIFORNIA says You are correct PJ
It does have zero connection to politics, with one exception..Courting them for their votes..Most of the time even this is questionable, as they represent a relatively small portion of the overall voting block..Of course in some areas, such as San Francisco, the LGTB vote can be quite sizable..I don't think most liberal office seekers actively seek the vote of child abusers, although some may give that appearance..Now I am not saying just because someone may be homosexual, bi or transgender they are also child molesters, most probably are not..There are some people who do not make that distinction..If this is for moral or political reasons can be debated..
PJzaBruin (22.214.171.124) from CALIFORNIA says Actually, Mac, my understanding is that for most pedophiles, any OTHER sexual relationships they have
Tend to be hetero.
But what adults do in privacy is really nobody else's business anyway, as long as it ONLY involves adults.
mac (Doyle McEwen) (126.96.36.199) from CALIFORNIA says I can't disagree PJ
What consenting adults do is their own business..What adults do involving children is pretty much everyones concern..When a politician, any politician appears to be courting these individuals or group of individuals to garner their votes, they too, should be put on that island you referenced and left there..
MikeF from FLORIDA says agree on some points
Child predators are scum and should be deposed of. The rest of what I said is dead on but as a card carrying liberal you have to support what is required. There is no way child predators fall under any normal category even if they portray themselves as such. Just being hetro doesn't make you normal.
Major Johnson#15608 (188.8.131.52) from TENNESSEE says Jerry Hrumprider
What is it that draws you to these stories? You seem to have a strong attraction to anything concerning pedophile.
Maybe we should send the authorities to have a look see at your puter?
Harumph #11038 from OHIO says Ignoring these stories MJ would support the idea of
That is a facet of the left.
It does however make me wonder why you protest when people shine the light of day on these animals.
You don't see people on the right nor conservatives in general arguing for "understanding" when it comes these animals.
Put em down. Problem solved.
Major Johnson#15608 (184.108.40.206) from TENNESSEE says That is a facet of the left.
No its not. Its a facet of your imagination. You of course have no proof, but how about this one?
MikeF from FLORIDA says I should say just keep a copy and when the light comes on let us know but I'll explain it slowly
I'm sure you already know, but to help you out. I am implying that you as a card carrying liberal lemming are required by the liberal elite to support every policy and idea they espouse whether you understand the implications or not. Also implied deeper is that since you are a liberal you truly believe that the liberal elite are indeed much smarter than you and should be making all of your important decisions and that you willfully and gleefully follow along. Ignorance is indeed bliss.
For everyone else the shorter version was enough.
You might want to attack my syntax this time instead of dealing with the reality of my statement.
No, never mind. You'll continue to sleep through life in your blissful ignorance, repeating bullchit like that which has been repeated ad nauseum by the wingnut media on Fox News and talk radio.
MikeF from FLORIDA says if the shoe fits
I'll stand with my assessment.
Have they started chopping your pension benefits or is it just looming over you? It has to suck to be dependent on someone else for your future security.
PJzaBruin (220.127.116.11) from CALIFORNIA says Looming? I guess you could say that
although after a 25-year career in private industry, my teaching pension will be just one of the revenue streams I receive once I retire.
Thing is, the State Teachers Retirement System will probably be the last one that is touched. Right now, there is only a small gap between the current assets and full funding -- and in the past, there has been a surplus.
We contribute a larger percentage to our pension than the police, fire, and municipal workers. Our plan has a more modest formula for calculating the pension benefit. The medical benefit is also more modest, converting to Medicare once the correct age is reached. And unlike those other plans, the practice of pension spiking (by putting in overtime hours or cashing out sick time during your last year or two) is not allowed in the California State Teacher Retirements System.
Once the DOW gets up to 14,000, the state teacher retirement system will probably be fully funded once again. The only reason it isn't now is the impact the Bush Recession has had on stock investments.
MikeF from FLORIDA says Bush is gone but the obama recession is here now and drags on and on
I don't expect the DOW to recover until some of the problems get fixed. That's going to be hard with the right person in office and impossible with the current moron.
PJzaBruin (18.104.22.168) from CALIFORNIA says Obama RECOVERY, MikeF
That's why the Dow and S&P are doing OK, and we've had 27 consecutive months of private sector job growth.
Harumph #11038 from OHIO says LOL.... Someone give Girly-J a towel
He has made a mess slurping the kool-aid again.
MikeF from FLORIDA says seriously PJ
This is what you were told is a recovery? No wonder you're not in the private sector anymore.
True job growth is when there are more jobs than before the recession. This is just picking numbers. As a percent of the total population there are less people working than any time in the last 6 decades. There are over 12 million people who can't find a job. Tell them this is a recovery.
Anyone see a connection to why our school children do so bad when compared to other countries.
BTW just to remind you the highest rate of job loss was after obama was elected. 2+2
PJzaBruin (22.214.171.124) from CALIFORNIA says Seriously, MikeF
If we weren't in the recovery, we would be in the Second Great Depression.
Recovery means you are IN THE. PROCESS of recovering (getting better). NOT that you have recovered (which is the standard you are trying to apply).
And if you are going to give Obama the blame for the job losses that occurred during the last 6months of Bush's Presidency and the first 2-3 months of his own, then never let me hear you or your minions try to blame anyone other than the Bush administration for the 9/11 attacks. Unlike the job losses caused by Bush administration policy, that occurred almost 8 full months into his term.
mac (Doyle McEwen) (126.96.36.199) from CALIFORNIA says You might have a deal there PJ
if you could explain how President Bush had any part in creating the events of 9/11..Yes, the attacks occured while he was President and yes, subsequent actions taken or not taken are his domain..The ultimate responsibility was his in those instances, just as the appropriate responses to Hurricane Katrina was his ultimate responsibility..Surely you do not buy into Kats theory our government caused the hurricane and/or damaged the levees..Or do you..
MikeF from FLORIDA says it would have been worse is in the top 3 on my lame-assed excuses chart
Left alone historically it would be over. maybe if we "adjust" history it will be different.
PJzaBruin (188.8.131.52) from CALIFORNIA says All I'm saying, Mac, is that Bush was in office for nearly 8 months when 9/11 occurred
and the outgoing administration warned him of the threat from Al Qaeda.
AND intel during the Summer of 2001 specifically mentioned the possibility of terrorists flying planes into buildings.
MikeF -- I'm saying the economy now IS better than when Obama took over as President. The ARRA, TARP, and the GM takeover had their desired result -- they kept our economy from falling off the cliff where the previous administration had it firmly pointed. For 27 months in a row, there has been positive job growth in the private sector, the DOW and S&P are near historic highs and corporate profits are very healthy.
Ereich (184.108.40.206) from MAINE says Tom Clancy wrote in 1994
a scenario where the executive and legislative and judicial branches are largely taken out by an airliner hitting the capitol as the STU is being given. In 2000 Joel Rosenberg wrote of an attack by a corporate jet crashed into a presidential convoy.
Was America ready for Israeli style security pre 9-11? The ACLU and CAIR won't even allow it now.
mac (Doyle McEwen) (220.127.116.11) from CALIFORNIA says There was lots of intelligence on possible
terrorist actions, not only did President Bush not take any action on those intelligence reports, neither did the President before him..So what is your point..
Erich I think if you re-read that Clancy novel you will find it was not the State of the Union sddress being given, but rather a joint session of Congress in order to name a new Vice-President..
PJzaBruin (18.104.22.168) from CALIFORNIA says "neither did the President before him"
except to fire missiles a few times in 1998, thinking he had good enough intelligence to take out Bin Laden following the attacks on US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania.
One chemical plant that got taken out Republicans like calling an aspirin factory, although the CIA says the remains included precursors for chemical weapons.
mac (Doyle McEwen) (22.214.171.124) from CALIFORNIA says Come on PJ
Surely you can do better than that..Was it the CIA that gave Clinton the intelligence indicating the attacks could take Bin Laden out, or was Clinton trying to deflect some of the pressure from the Lewinsky crap..I happened to agree with Clintons attempts, but can you explain to me how these actions in any way could have prevented or stayed the events of 9/11..If their intelligence indicated possible attacks on buildings in the US using airplanes, what if anything did Clinton do to prevent it..Would the correct answer be nothing..We know President Bush effectively did nothing to prevent them..