Quoted: Quoted: And "It's OK because he's disgusting" isn't a valid argument for making law, even though he is indeed disgusting. No it isn't. But furthering criminal behavior is NOT protected under the 1st amendment. A place specifically designed to be a resource for pedophiles isn't protected speech. While I can obtain a license to handle and even manufacture explosives, I can't obtain a license to have sex with a seven year old. Big difference. Putting out literature calling for the violent overthrow of the US government is indeed a crime. Literature where I encourage people to go out and beat up some Jews in the most efficient way possible isn't protected by the 1st amendment. Neither is manufacturing materials designed to assist in the targeting and sexual assault of children.

the google cache makes it clear that isn't what he was doing.  Nambla does the same thing and that site has been around since Al Gore invented the internet (coincidence? I think not)

Quoted: How can so many of you advocate killing people who torture animals, but seem to have no problem with this guys actions? I have to wonder about anyone that thinks this guys doesn't deserve a dirt nap.

he put up a website

had he actually molested a little girl, I favor the Charlie Daniels solution.  (tie him to a log in the swamp and wait for the gators)

Until he actually commits a crime, there isn't anything we can do legally.

Quoted: Quoted: While I definitely do not think what he is doing is right and is actually really fucked up, he isn't breaking any laws. think if they made it illegal to have ARFCOM because it shows how to put together scary rifles. Interesting analogy there, Sparky. You do recognize that there's just a bit of ethical, moral and legal difference between asembling a rifle and having sex with a three year old, right?

To a Liberal?  No.

He's back.

Story on NWCN HERE. (Registration required)

Admitted pedophile starts new Web site

10:57 AM PDT on Saturday, May 19, 2007
By ROB PIERCY / KING 5 News

EVERETT, Wash. – The man behind a disturbing Web site that was taken off-line is back at it again. The Web site is called "Seattle Tacoma Everett Girl Love."

A virtual how-to manual for pedophiles was shut down in March because of the content. But, the Web site's creator has found a new host and is back online.

Two months ago, Jack McClellan made a frightening admission – that he is a pedophile.

Just this week, his page came back online. This time, with a foreign host and a new Web address.

The pictures of little girls are gone, but in their place is a disturbing message board and reviews of family events he recently attended.

One of those events was the downtown Mount Vernon Street Fair. He said it exceeded his expectations.

But what he didn't expect was me watching him as he watched little girls dancing at the street fair.

When confronted by me, he took off his hat and glasses.

"I'm just... barely nothing down here, just enjoying the party," he said.

When asked if he had a camera, he replied: "Yes, but I'm not taking pictures of kids anymore."

Even if he was, that's not against the law, nor is he doing anything illegal by watching little girls and writing about it.

But the father of two girls discussed on McClellan's Web site says other parents need to be on the lookout and know who to look for. He says McClellan is a ticking time bomb.

Send the link to Chris Hansen for another "To Catch A Predator" show

Quoted: had he actually molested a little girl, I favor the Charlie Daniels solution.  (tie him to a log in the swamp and wait for the gators)

May I suggest the Charlie Bronson solution instead?

The First Amendment at its best. Two words, Intent & Conspiracy.

It's really hard to believe someone hasn't yet.

I wonder if one could surveil him legally, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, and if he "made a move" on a child, protect the life and limb of that child with their CCW.  Of course this would take a dedicated group of with knowledge of recon tactics and CCWs to work in "shifts."  I really wonder if this would be a legal and viable citizen's protection type of group, seeing as the police have no obligation to protect individuals, and I doubt any agencies have the resources to dedicate to it anyway.  Kinda like a "good will" bodyguard agency. =P

A google search of the quoted title brought this up:

www.digg.com/tech_news/How_to_be_a_great_pedophile

The first link is to the old site I guess, and the second link is to the new one.

Here's a pic of him:

45-year-old Jack McClellan, has never been convicted of a sex crime, which means he can attend any family-friendly events where children are present, and take all the pictures he wants for his Web site. He also lives close to a school bus stop. his "age of attraction" is between 3 and 11 years old.

Sick bastard.

This is firemission worthy.

WHY are people like this still able to breath??

Quoted: Quoted: How can so many of you advocate killing people who torture animals, but seem to have no problem with this guys actions? I have to wonder about anyone that thinks this guys doesn't deserve a dirt nap. he put up a website had he actually molested a little girl, I favor the Charlie Daniels solution.  (tie him to a log in the swamp and wait for the gators) Until he actually commits a crime, there isn't anything we can do legally.

Using children (3-11 year olds) as a lure for other offenders, should be enough.

Why do you want to blur the line between protecting little kids, and his "god given right as an American" to be a total scumbag?

Reminds me of the Jethro Tull song Aqualung:

Sitting on a park bench
eyeing little girls
with bad intent.
Snot running down his nose
greasy fingers smearing shabby clothes.
Drying in the cold sun
Watching as the frilly panties run.
Feeling like a dead duck
spitting out pieces of his broken luck.

Sick, sick, sick bastard.  If I caught someone leering at my 3-11 year old daughter he would have a substantially different looking face afterward.  

Jesus Christ.

I'd like for this no good POS to take a picture of my little girl

There was something on the news here about this a few months ago. Seems they even have their own "symbols" either on bumper stickers, shirts, or jewlery. One was for boys and the other for girls.

Edit: Found them on Wiki-like site. This makes me fucking sick.

"Boy Love"


"Girl Love"


"Butterfly"  The butterfly logo is constructed out of four hearts: a big blue for man, a big pink for woman, a small blue for boy, a small pink for girl. The butterfly logo is used by pedophile organizations all over the world.

(Double Post)

I like old-fashioned solutions....

Quoted: I've got $.25 for the bullet.

I've got  bullets and a gun for someone to use!

mike

Wow, he needs to be detained.  And then neutered.  And then shot.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: And "It's OK because he's disgusting" isn't a valid argument for making law, even though he is indeed disgusting. No it isn't. But furthering criminal behavior is NOT protected under the 1st amendment. A place specifically designed to be a resource for pedophiles isn't protected speech. While I can obtain a license to handle and even manufacture explosives, I can't obtain a license to have sex with a seven year old. Big difference. Putting out literature calling for the violent overthrow of the US government is indeed a crime. Literature where I encourage people to go out and beat up some Jews in the most efficient way possible isn't protected by the 1st amendment. Neither is manufacturing materials designed to assist in the targeting and sexual assault of children. the google cache makes it clear that isn't what he was doing.  Nambla does the same thing and that site has been around since Al Gore invented the internet (coincidence? I think not)

But Gore Did Help Invent the Internet
By Jonathan Coopersmith
History News Service

When Al Gore allegedly claimed he invented the Internet, comedians, political pundits and Republicans had a field day mocking him. The amusing humor and misrepresentation of what Gore said hide the deeper issue about the relationship between political patrons and how technologies develop. Gore's actual role in the development of the Internet reveals just how important patrons are.

Technologies do not suddenly emerge like popcorn from a microwave. As they progress from idea to reality, technologies are pulled, pushed, shaped, mashed, prodded, poked, shifted, cajoled and otherwise subjected to the actions and inactions of people they touch. And without resources to evolve and grow, even the most promising technology will remain only an intriguing possibility.

Creating the fiber optic network, along with the servers, software and other components of what became the Internet, didn't differ from the creation of hundreds of other new technologies in the past. They demanded decades of work by skilled people, lots of money, and other supporting technologies. Like jet aircraft and interchangeable parts, the Internet was financed and promoted by the federal government.

Government decisions, like those in the business world, do not occur in a vacuum. Behind every major invention and inventor stands a patron. For the Internet, Al Gore was that patron. The historic image of a patron is a supporter of the arts, but technologies need support too.

Try to imagine the history of the space program without the commitment of President John F. Kennedy to send men to the moon. Kennedy did not actually build the gigantic Saturn V rocket that launched Americans into space. Nor do patrons of the arts actually paint the art that now graces museum walls. They do, however, supply the resources, usually financial, and other support that make it possible for others to do the work.

Elected representatives may also advocate the development of new technologies. Yes, one tends to find promoters of pork barreling -- directing money to specific projects -- more than true patrons. But distinguishing the two is easy. The patron works openly, not covertly, to advance his (or her) favored technology. The benefits do not flow only (if at all) to the patron's home state. Finally, the patron promotes a broad vision instead of a specific earmarked project.

So what exactly did Al Gore do and claim he did? In May of1999, Gore told CNN's Wolf Blitzer, "During my service in the U.S. Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet." This quickly was mutated into "I created the Internet" and became part of the presidential campaign.

As usual in the history of a technology, the truth is more complex -- and interesting. As a Congressman in the 1970s, Gore was a leader in introducing computers into the Congress itself. When he was a Senator, Gore sponsored several bills making the federal government a catalyst for the "information superhighway." While only the 1991 High Performance Computing Act became law, his constant prodding gave the concept high visibility within government and among academic and industry leaders.

More important, Gore was responsible for mandating the 1987 Reagan White House policy study of government computer networks. The 1991 law directed over a billion dollars to connecting computers into national networks linking universities, schools, and other institutions.

Even more important than the money were the goals of improving public access, creating digital libraries, and pushing unclassified technology from the military into the public and commercial spheres. Coordination among government agencies, including NASA and the Department of Defense was strongly encouraged. These activities laid the foundation for the explosive growth of the Internet in the mid-1990s.

In sponsoring his 1991 bill, Gore envisioned a national network that would "provide for teleconferencing, link your computer to millions of computers around the country, give you access to huge 'digital libraries' of information, and deliver services we cannot yet imagine." Not a bad or  inaccurate vision.

Gore did not claim he wrote programs or built computers. What he did as a congressman, senator, and vice president was more important: promoting a national policy to transfer defense-funded computer research to the private and educational worlds and to promote universal access.

Some may argue that the Internet would have developed anyway. While true, it would probably have occurred with less public and educational access, and definitely later.

Gore's early initiatives helped shape the Internet into a more open and universal system with more access to federal and university databases than it would have otherwise. We, the citizens, have benefited directly because of this.

Most histories of computing have deservedly revolved around the actual scientists, engineers and users. Conspicuously absent from these histories are politicians, thus tacitly implying that Congress and the President simply approved budget requests from federal agencies. This was not so. At least one elected official actively participated in creating the Internet: Al Gore.

Gore did not create the Internet. Nor did he claim to. He did, however, create a more supportive federal environment that significantly accelerated the development, form, and diffusion of the Internet. If that does not make him the political saint of the Internet, his many years of promotion definitely qualify him as a major patron.







--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jonathan Coopersmith is an associate professor of history at Texas A&M University and teaches the history of technology. He is a writer for the History News Service.

[Jonathan Coopersmith: Dept. of History, MS 4236, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas 77843; telephone:  (979) 845-7148; fax: (979) 862-4314; e-mail: [email protected].]


ALL HAIL AL GORE

UNFUCKINGREAL!

I don't see how what he is doing is legal.  He is 'aiding and abetting' and possibly 'conspiring' to commit child molestation:

A criminal charge of aiding and abetting or accessory can usually be brought against anyone who helps in the commission of a crime, though legal distinctions vary by state. A person charged with aiding and abetting or accessory is usually not present when the crime itself is committed, but he or she has knowledge of the crime before or after the fact, and may assist in its commission through advice, actions, or financial support. Depending on the degree of involvement, the offender's participation in the crime may rise to the level of conspiracy.

Someone who writes a book or has a website about how to convert an AK-47 or AR-15 into full-auto is not 'aiding and abetting' since it is perfectly legal for some people to do so (Class II manufacturer).  But it is never legal to molest a child.

That would be a dead motherfucker if that was my little girl or son.  Mark my words.

Quoted: That would be a dead motherfucker if that was my little girl or son.  Mark my words.

If I recall correctly Florida is one big swamp.

Sick,sick,........Just sick.

Quoted: Quoted: What ever happened to a good old fashioned "beat him up and scare the Christ out of him" tactic? In a few years beating up a pedo might be considered a hate crime if the PC march continues.

Well it seems like "don't get caught" is assumed to be part of any plan involving beating the shit out of someone...

height=8

Quoted: height=8 Quoted: That would be a dead motherfucker if that was my little girl or son.  Mark my words. If I recall correctly Florida is one big swamp. hit Police?   Screw being scared of the police.  He would pray to Christ himself that the police get him before I did.

I found a cache of his old web site and found my home town listed on his childrens events board.  I plan to have kids next year.


Here's an interesting web site by an angry father who saw the interview.  He has a message board for people to leave comments to jack, who actually visits it and leaves his comments too.  Go tell jack what you think of him.
www.jackmcclellan.com

Yet another in a long list of uses for .308

Welcome to glorious 2007....

That guy is still alive???

IN before he gets snuffed...can we start a pool, maybe a free membership upgrade to whoever guesses closest to his demise?


I say July 5 2007...

that is one sick dirtbag!!!  I can't believe the hosters don't kill the site....maybe they're afraid of the ACLU.

Quoted: Quoted: had he actually molested a little girl, I favor the Charlie Daniels solution.  (tie him to a log in the swamp and wait for the gators) May I suggest the Charlie Bronson solution instead? bostondirtdogs.boston.com/Headline_Archives/Bronson.bmp

Or the Dirty Harry solution?

Quoted: Theres quite a few "voyeur" type laws hitting law books now that make this kind of thing illegal.   The other thing though is any face that can be identified on his site, he needs a model release for or he cant post it. I wonder how much his site membership grew because of the publishing of the article though

According to the law, no, he doesn't.  Your likeness is of course protected, but only against commercial use.  Unless he is selling the images, or using them to endorse something he's selling, its considered editorial use.

Its still sick, though.

holy crap, that guy is a douchbag I hope he gets stabbed by his own people!!!

Quoted: Yet another in a long list of uses for .308some rope ,a tree and couple of hungry alligators!!

Fixed it for you!!

Jack's just one of the few visible ones. You should check out that website they linked to in the discussion forum; there are a LOT more like him out there, and it makes me sick to my stomach to see them chatting away like they're doing nothing wrong.

If we were truly a civilized country, him and all the others like him would be dead by now.

Shoot, shovel, shutup.

Quoted: Quoted: Unfortunately that isn't the case. Often the obsession with children is not merely about sexual gratification and thus castration would not be sufficient to stop the baby raping behavior. could you explain that a little more. i thought it was all about sex

Rape isn't always about sex. It is often about power and control, and simply castrating someone does not automatically end their ability or desire to sexually violate a victim.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Unfortunately that isn't the case. Often the obsession with children is not merely about sexual gratification and thus castration would not be sufficient to stop the baby raping behavior. could you explain that a little more. i thought it was all about sex Rape isn't always about sex. It is often about power and control, and simply castrating someone does not automatically end their ability or desire to sexually violate a victim.

Males castrated after puberty can still get erections.  Rich Roman matrons used to use them as "safe" sex slaves.  Also, mutilating the genitals tends to fuck up the mind in regards to sex.  Roman Eunuchs were legendary for their perverted sexual desires.  

The only solution for the pedophile is to destroy the mind, that is where the evil comes from.  I recommend .44 magnum just to be sure.

Quoted: Quoted: had he actually molested a little girl, I favor the Charlie Daniels solution.  (tie him to a log in the swamp and wait for the gators) May I suggest the Charlie Bronson solution instead? bostondirtdogs.boston.com/Headline_Archives/Bronson.bmp

Do you know how hard it is to find ammo for a .44 Automag?

Quoted: Quoted: While I definitely do not think what he is doing is right and is actually really fucked up, he isn't breaking any laws. think if they made it illegal to have ARFCOM because it shows how to put together scary rifles. Exactly. The 1st Amendment should not be up for "interpretation" any more than the 2nd should. There are people who are just as visceral in their hatred of guns as we are in our hatred of people like this; that doesn't mean they have the right to silence us. This man is sick, seriously sick, he's probably got something miswired in his brain. If he takes any action that causes harm to another, the law should come down on him like a ton of bricks. But the Bill of Rights applies to everyone.

Amazing how there are only a couple of people who said something to this effect. Of course what he is doing is immoral. The problem is, government is not and should not be in the business of legislating morality. He has committed no crimes, and is therefor innocent.

Imagine how the anti-gun groups think about us. They are equally outraged that we have visual step-by-step guides to building "assault rifles" that can be used to wantonly mow down bus loads of innocent school children.

Innocent until proven guilty is not just a cliche. The Constitution and the protections it affords should not be for sale because of knee-jerk reactions. Where does that sound familiar? VA Tech and Congress, anyone?

Do you know how hard it is to find ammo for a .44 Automag?

Trim down a 308 case , CSI will go nuts

I found an archived version of his old web site. In addition to being badly designed, it's thoroughly disgusting. He has guides for finding 'unsupervised girls on the streets', psychodelic drugs, etc. The man is a walking posterchild for SSS.

Quoted: Do you know how hard it is to find ammo for a .44 Automag? Trim down a 308 case , CSI will go nuts

I thought that was Beverly Hills Cop 2?

Quoted: I found an archived version of his old web site. In addition to being badly designed, it's thoroughly disgusting. He has guides for finding 'unsupervised girls on the streets', psychodelic drugs, etc. The man is a walking posterchild for SSS.

I figured by now that the sick fuck would of been put down by now

He's back.  Again.

Fox News Link

wow unbelievable

Let's stop talking about this before they link his horrible death (or castration) to this site.