MARCH 9–In an aggressive bid to entice prospective “sex tourists,” the Department of Homeland Security last year launched an undercover web site that purported to arrange trips from the U.S. to Canada, where clients could engage in sexual activity with minors, The Smoking Gun has learned.
The “Precious Treasure Holiday Company” web site was active until a few weeks ago when its Massachusetts-based web hosting firm removed the site from its servers, apparently in response to a complaint about its content. Now, visitors to precioustreasureholidaycompany.com are greeted with the message, “This site has been suspended.” After a year online, the DHS undercover site may have fallen victim to its own sleazy, overt come-on. As seen at right, the site’s front page carried three symbols that an FBI intelligence bulletin has identified as being used by pedophiles. Additionally, the site’s acronym, PTHC, is an allusion to “preteen hardcore” pornography. The site’s carefully misspelled motto–“We Help Make Your Fantasy’s Come True!”–also does little to mask its illicit intentions.
An account executive with the hosting firm, who appeared unaware that “Precious Treasure Holiday Company” was a government operation, said that following a site’s suspension an internal investigation is launched. Upon the review’s completion, a site is either reinstated or terminated. The executive, Jason Crawford, added that if a customer’s site is found to contain illicit material like child pornography, the FBI is contacted.
[Five years ago, FBI agents concocted a similar sting, launching “Wicked Adventures Travel,” a web site purporting to offer pedophiles “exotic excursions” to the Philippines and Thailand. That operation yielded at least one felony conviction.]
I don’t really have a problem with the tactic, but is this a job for DHS, or are they looking to recruit?
DHS is sticking their hands in every thing. And you are right this isn’t one of the things they should be sticking it in. This is clearly within FBI juristiction
DHS=SS
These kinds of stings make me believe law enforcement is lazy.
Have they looked into the TSA yet?
Make it an island destination. Plane lands, you walk down the steps and head into the small airport. Turns out there is noone at the airport, and while you were walking the plane takes off.
#2 hhopper got it right.
DHS is issuing grants to small towns and parishes in LA to install cameras. Good citizens have nothing to fear naturally.
http://tinyurl.com/4he95cf
An $86,500 state Homeland Security anti-terrorism grant as well as $400 from the Sheriff’s Office financed the purchase and installation of the equipment….
St. Tammany Parish Sheriff’s Office leaders declined to discuss the cameras they operate and would not provide information on when they were first installed or the total number set up throughout the parish.
Coming from the people who want to look at and feel your junk at airports!!!!!
Looks like their cover is blown – har.
Agree this is a waste of money and a questionable assignment for the DHS.
As a Canadian, I never understood one dichotomy of Canadian law. Due to our French population, we maintained a very low age of consent until recently (14). But if you were caught paying for sex with someone between the age of 14 and 18 you were considered to be guilty of child abuse. Now I understand your average 14 year old is not willingly a prostitute.
I don’t like that a country (the US) can charge one of their citizens for breaking one of their laws (even a Canadian citizen) in a country where it isn’t a crime.
So using a drug in a foreign country where it is legal, and then being arrested in the States. The same goes for sex tourism to some extend.
So when will they piss test everyone crossing into the US to see if they have used a drug illegal in the US, and then arresting them?
You could extend it.
In Canada you could advertise holidays in the USA where you can shoot a gun – then arrest the potential terrorists.
Advertise holidays in Britain where you could drive on the wrong side of the road, or Germany where you can drive any speed you like – and arrest them for dangerous driving.
A bunch of hillbillies in West Virginia tried this too offering sex with miners.
At the foundation of our civil liberties lies the principle that denies to government officials an exceptional position before the law and which subjects them to the same rules of conduct that are commands to the citizen.
The government is the potent omnipresent teacher. For good or ill it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. To declare that the end justifies the means — to declare that the government may commit crimes — would bring terrible retribution.
How has this got anything to do with
Der Homelund?
Fucking Nazi Fed shits.
Well seeing how wives and girlfriends go on and on to their friends how they husbands act like little children, does that then mean most women in the US are paedophiles?
Food for thought.
Cursor_
I am torn. While I find it worthwhile to remove pedo’s from society by almost any means. How is this related to the job of homeland security. I don’t think Al Quaida is into little girls or boys.
I have never been comfortable with “sting” operations. In my mind it doesn’t matter if they would have done it anyway, they are doing it because you are enticing them.
1. If something is against the law for Citizen X, why should that law not be enforced by Government X whenever it has control of Citizen X? If you want to smoke Pot in Belgium, then stay in Belgium. The law either expresses a valid restraint on behavior, or its a game. And that’s why Buckley supported legalization of drugs==because he saw it was all a game.
2. Who cares what arm of the law enforces a law?
3. I thought “all” the law enforcement agencies were within DHS? Supposed to help communication and data sharing.
4. All sting operations are good and valid as it avoids creating/allowing a victim to be harmed to begin with.
5. What “crimes” do government engage in when operating sting operations? I would think the missing element is “intent.”
It may be that ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) is the agency inside of DHS that is running the sting. I believe they were also responsible for taking down websites for piracy back around Thanksgiving.
Looking at the court order link from “The Smoking Gun” shows reference to DHS-HSI. Googling this gives you a government website for HOMELAND SECURITY STUDIES AND ANALYSIS INSTITUTE.
http://homelandsecurity.org/
Please go to their site and click links in the “About Us” section, especially History and Mission Areas.
This is from the Governance:
Governance
The Institute is a not-for-profit center that operates under an indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity contract vehicle between DHS and Analytic Services Inc. We are devoted exclusively to supporting the homeland security mission. Our primary sponsor, the Under Secretary for Science and Technology, designates an Executive Agent to ensure that we are used for our intended purposes. The Executive Agent reviews and approves the Institute’s research plan and provides day-to-day oversight of the organization.
After reading about this Institute referenced in my earlier post, and it is my understanding these are the people behind setting up the website, my conclusion is that this Institute needs to continually show it’s usefulness to keep the money rolling in.
A wise friend told me “Just because it is not-for-profit, doesn’t mean somebody isn’t profiting off of it.”
DHS seems to be doing just about everything rather than what it was supposed to be created to do. The reason why is obvious. They were given about a 100 times the resources they need.
Wow! The FBI did the same thing and got a whole (ie ONE) conviction out of it. I’ll bet that was an expensive arrest.
I’m all for going after the sites that are providing this sort of “service” and the consumers of the service.
I’m (generally) not for stings.
#22–Ed==how would the law “go after” these websites except by a sting operation? IE==pretend to be a customer and see what they do?
along those lines, every a-hole has an opinion, fewer can say why.
Why are you (generally) not for stings? Why do you thing the constant victimization of innocent people is a valid and moral tradeoff?
We also now see the writing skills of Homeland Insecurity. Every plural word does not use an apostrophe.
You all should take a closer look at what “Publius” said. He seems to put into words the feeling I have about all this deception and criminal behavior authorities engage in to catch criminals. BTW- are the DHS guys pedos themselves, or do they have closet pedos on-staff? They seem way too authentic for people putting up a fake pedo website. Also, shouldn’t we be trying to find the root causes of pedophilia and attacking those? Or do some in power already know why it is and what to do to stop it? Uh-huh.
# 25 Rich said, “Or do some in power already know why it is and what to do to stop it?”
Well, I understand that photos of mature women with small breasts is now classed as pedo porn in Australia. I suppose women with shaved pubes are pedo lures, too.
Wow! Just thought. Japanese men are reputed to be overly fond of women who dress in school uniforms. A nation of pedophiles.
Seems to me the FBI should be the investigating agency and they should be following leads to extant crimes not luring people – some of whom might be interested but never before inclined to participate.
You wonder what might happen to someone who accidentally comes to their site. Anybody here ever clicked on a mundane-appearing link only to get redirected to a porn site? No, me, either.
Do they collect the IP address and then make you register as a sex offender?
Personally, I don’t comprehend the interest so many men have in young girls or most of the other paraphilias, for that matter. We get a lot of sex tourists here in Thailand and a LOT of them (seems like a disproportionate number of Germans!) are here for the kids. I think it must be a dominance thing in most cases.
There have been cases reported in the press here of the FBI assisting local law enforcement in apprehending child traffickers. As much as I dislike seeing the FBI operating on foreign soil, this seems a better use of personnel than running a bogus website.
You anti-sting people keep up the call against it but none of you offer the rational. I suppose Animby comes closest–that you can get arrested if you happen by a website by accident?
We are talking about CRIME here people. Is viewing kiddieporn a crime–or just downloading it and keeping it on your porn dedicated hard drive? I don’t know. I’m not a pedophile by “my” definition–meaning I would never underfund public education, but a crime is a crime.
In this instant case, the CRIME I assume is traveling to a foreign place to have sex with underage kiddie sex slaves. While for my own hypocrisy I have some doubts about simple viewing of kiddie porn on the web, I have no doubt about engaging in the rape/torture of little kiddies over seas, or even at home, or even in your own house.
If you agree such sex is a CRIME and should be, how best—get it, how BEST to stop this activity? And the answer of course is a sting operation as close as you can get to the point of CRIME.
And the objection Animby raises is that you might sign up on the website and buy a ticket and travel to the foreign place out of curiosity with no intent to actually have sex. Well, maybe so. Or maybe just an exception to the law should be written in that it only applies to Germans?
Matters of degrees of course. In such circumstances, it is the close cases that should be argued, not the concept itself, expecially when no alternatives are offered other than: Let crime run rampant.
Like me rants against the future course of Sharia Law, its telling when intelligent people can’t see their own sloppy thinking–they are so skilled otherwise.
Silly hoomans.
Well I do have a problem with the tactic. It’s like spraying the forests with gasoline, and seeing who’ll light a match to it, and charging them with arson. This entrapment tactic, just catches a few stupid offenders, without dealing with the REAL underground illegal market. Like having police women pose as hookers, to catch some Johns. But doing nothing about the hookers and managers, that already exist. And I’ll wager these “stings” let some of the more prominent and well connected pervs get off. Whereas if they started busting clients of the REAL illegal market. They might have to explain why Mayor so-n-so, or police chief such-n-such, was caught and then released, all charges dropped.
A sting lets them filter out those who can better pay to not be persecuted. So just a bunch of poorer, clueless schmucks get jail time.
And if these “Stings” are anything like what the ATF did with allowing guns to travel to Mexico, and be used to kill people there. And then border agents in the US. Then I’d say such stings are in serious risk of putting the lives of the “bait”, in danger too. Stings are nothing more than a flypaper solution. But does nothing to patch the holes in the window screens, of society.
#28–Glenn==you say: “Well I do have a problem with the tactic. It’s like spraying the forests with gasoline, and seeing who’ll light a match to it, and charging them with arson.” /// Well, there’s your problem right there: in a “sting” operation the forest is sprayed with a safe fluid that will NOT BURN. then as you say, we wait to see who will light a match. But because this is a STING operation, there is no risk to the forest.
You see the difference here?
Silly hoomans.
Must have been a slow year in terrorism.
I’ll tell you folks, especially you dupes from BP and Homeland Security, that there is plenty of video footage and statements from top Homeland Security out there to prove to me that this was not a sting operation. Just how in the hell do you train people to NOT molest children? Start with those child molesters working for Homeland Security. Check out the movie, “Conspiracy of Silence” and read “The Franklin Cover-up.” THEN try to say this was a sting operation with a straight face.