Federal fraud: Porn addicts at NSF

Judith Reisman
October 02, 2009
Reproduced with Permission

Remember when the excuse for legalizing pornography was "I don't care what people do in the privacy of their own homes so long as it doesn't cost me money and harm"? Now, roughly $6 billion a year from American taxpayers to the National Science Foundation is inadequate for NSF expenses. Why? Too many NSF folks are "porn surfing," hooked on porn, an endogenous drug. This fact should stir questions about the NSF history of bias against honest pornography research.

The NSF Statutory Mission reads, "To promote the progress of science; to advance the national health, prosperity, and welfare; and to secure the national defense." Really? This "mission" is impossible if a critical mass of NSF leaders and staff are pornography addicts. Leslie Paige, a spokeswoman for Citizens Against Government Waste, called the situation "inexcusable."

"What kind of oversight is there when they have to shift people from looking at grant fraud to watch for people looking at pornography?" she said. Well, by definition, NSF leaders and workers are themselves using their granting funds to defraud the state while allegedly looking for grant fraud.

NSF says "computer training" and better filters will help. What has rendered NSF impotent all these years? One critic said, "Fire the IT departments and the IT directors for failing to control the resources which they have been entrusted to operate."

Fair enough. Except that those in the computer field are especially susceptible to erototoxins. Just this week the CEO of a major IT company was arrested for lewd and lascivious battery on a child via Internet pornography. The Washington Times reported that NSF pornography use was so massive it "forced the internal watchdog to cut back on its primary mission of investigating grant fraud and recovering misspent tax dollars."

I suggest NSF fraud and its leaders are the problem, stymieing research that could prove pornography's harm. When scientists are blocked from real pornography research, our courts and legislatures, now dependent on "scientific data," cannot adjudicate pornography accurately.

In my experience, pornography addiction is a widespread problem in most agencies, while Big Pornography and its government helpers have censored pornography research since the late '70s.

In 1983 my U.S. Department of Justice grant proposal to study Images of Children, Crime & Violence in Playboy, Penthouse, and Hustler (Grant No. 84-JN-AX-K007) lay unread for two Christmas weeks on our legislators' vacated desks.

When Congress, including their closeted pedophile and pornography-addicted comrades, returned to the Hill, their two-week protest time had elapsed and our study went forward. Big Pornography found legislative hirelings for three congressional "investigations" to try to kill the two-year study. Media assaults and slanders appeared from January 1984 until today.

Most important, once the Attorney General's Commission on Pornography was bushwhacked, mine would arguably be the last honest peer-reviewed pornography study to survive Big Pornography's guardians. Even our few tenured pornography warrior scholars faded away.

Since then, professors, university presidents, psychiatrists, military officers, teachers, governors, mayors, psychologists, sexologists, legislators, judges, scientists, doctors, law enforcement officers, a Nobel Prize winner, filmmakers and the like have been regularly arrested for child pornography and its fallout, child sexual abuse.

Big Pornography and Big Sexology had always been a team. In the last few years, Big Pharma joined up. The fortunes from impotence drugs like Viagra, STD vaccines for the kiddies and other sexually based disorder drugs made the Sex Industrial Complex merger a natural.

And, no wonder. The brain sciences have long established pornography as a natural, endogenous, self-medicating drug. It's users are, in fact, stoned. That is one reason they often do not even realize when they are being observed  Lt. Col. Dave Grossman calls this "tunnel vision."

"On Combat," by Grossman, retired U.S. Army Ranger and Pulitzer-nominated author of "On Killing," and his co-author Loren Christensen is a book for and about warriors. The authors identify the "flight or fight" and sex states of brain arousal. In fear and in sex "your forebrain shuts down and the midbrain, the 'puppy' inside ... the same as your dog's brain, reaches up and 'hijacks' the [thinking] forebrain."

Pornographically stoned NSF leaders and workers? One "senior executive" was so self-medicated that he justified months of pornography consumption as a good will gesture. Porn use is addictive. Most NSF workers would tend to know of the addict's consumption. They don't talk for many reasons.

Of course, NSF didn't fire those who were defrauding the state. Why? Despite the truth staring out at them, NSF leaders would be convinced pornography is harmless fun. It's the waste of time that is the problem. The causal links between "adult" pornography and child sexual abuse, kidnapping, homicide, the growing traffic in women and children, rape, incest, sexual harassment in the workplace, divorce, wife and child battery, increased venereal disease epidemics and on and on  these facts NSF officials deny.

If NSF leaders were not the real problem, their 1,200 career employees would not now be on the firing line. The only reason we have any knowledge of a "6-fold increase in employee misconduct" is that a few "short summaries" by the inspector general "caught the attention of Sen. Charles E. Grassley of Iowa, ranking Republican on the Senate Finance Committee." He launched an inquiry about NSF misconduct.

Sen. Grassley is one of the few legislative warriors who champions equal rights for women and children to a safe environment free of the pornographer's sexual hate propaganda.

Thanks to Grassley, the watching public learned that NSF pornography addictions are "expensive and often went undetected for long periods of time." Until there is legal action at NSF, we the people will not know who has been defrauding us at the agency.

That seems to be the idea.