While researching how public libraries became a popular spot for weirdos to go and watch porn (especially child porn) on free, untraceable WiFi, I discovered something truly hideous. There is an entire community out there who film themselves masturbating in libraries (usually while watching porn on publicly funded WiFi) and then upload these videos to […]
During the four month long investigation into unfiltered pornography offered to Orland Park Library patrons, I have had many interactions with the Village of Orland Park but none as interesting as the last one. My main contact at the Village has been Joe LaMargo, Public Information Officer and designated “Crisis Manager”. My first meeting with him was very cordial and he explained to me that the Village has zero authority over the Library, they have their own board of directors and the Village people aren’t allowed to ask them to do anything and barely even speak to them. I believed him, until I found emails between Village Manager Paul Grimes and Library Director Mary Weimar where he offers her advice on how to deal with “those people.” (Namely, Kevin DuJan and myself and anyone else who objects to porn in the Library.)
This revelation made the Village look like liars and the same day I discovered it and confronted LaMargo in his office (where he continually rubbed his hands over his face and jiggled his left leg under the table at around 200 beats per minute) the Mayor of Orland Park finally decided to enter the fray and ask for filters in a letter to the Library. His previous response to my phone calls and requests for a meeting went unanswered or cancelled. Only when I caught the Village telling lies did the Mayor suddenly decide to make a statement and side with parents. (It should be noted that I hadn’t planned on disclosing this bit of information but with the Village breaking bad on me I don’t feel like I owe them any professional courtesy that I otherwise would have granted them.)
Even after that point, LaMargo continued to be friendly with me and help me with any FOIA requests I had. He was very responsive and always gave me what I asked for well before the deadline. However, the minute I started asking about the laws that govern Sexually Oriented Businesses (S.O.B.) in the Village (there are no S.O.B.s in Orland Park unless you count the ones on the Library Board) his demeanor changed to ice cold. Suddenly, he wasn’t responding to me personally, he was dodging my phone calls and was “out to lunch” when I dropped in to see him. He started having his secretary return my calls and emails as if he were suddenly promoted to Village Pope. For the last week before this rapid change in attitude I had been asking him informally to point me to the Village code that governed any S.O.B. in Orland Park. Surely, the Village must have such a thing because in the entire area there are no businesses selling sex; no porn shops, peep shows, strip clubs, bathhouses or adult book stores. The answer I got (through his secretary) was to “look it up” on a highly confusing website that houses the Village codes. I need not tell you what a government website is like. You’ve no doubt been to your state’s “Obamacare Health Exchange Website.” This one is no exception to the rule that government-run operations are overly complicated and difficult to navigate.
The most recent board meeting at the Orland Park Public Library was an illustration of tyrannical government in action. Currently, Orland Park Public Library allows unfiltered internet access which means access to violent porn, bestiality, the exploitation of sex trafficked women, and child pornography. They have no plans to do anything about it despite the Mayor of Orland Park joining the growing chorus for filters on all computers.
Instead, the library defends its inaction with claims of freedom of speech while public masturbators commit their fetishes in a library full of children. The public embarrassment and citizen outcry has not made one iota of difference to the hardcore leftists on the board. Their commitment to porn and the American Library Association’s insistence that it is protected in a public space (even when paid for by unwilling taxpayers) is unwavering.
I have spoken at five board meetings along with other members of the community. Each time the topic was the same. “Put filters on the computers.” Each five minute speech was tailored to a different angle pointing out different reasons why filters are necessary and constitutional. I always followed their rules and policies to the letter. But at the last meeting, even though I have followed all the rules they wrote, the board decided they had heard enough about the porn problem at their library. They arbitrarily decided we are no longer able to speak about anything relating to “computers” or “sexual misconduct” in their library. Keep in mind, these are the “free speech” people.
In the beginning of the video below, my colleague Kevin DuJan begins talking about the fact that the library is now charging money for non-residents to use unfiltered computers, thus profiting from pornography turning the library into a “sexually oriented business.” He is stopped way before he gets to this revelation because his topic is not approved by the Board of Overlords. Strangely, they keep saying they have heard this before, but they haven’t because they just instituted this policy of charging non-residents before the last board meeting so up until that day no patron was able to comment on it publicly. Pay close attention to how he switches his tactics and starts praising the library for random things. He is not interrupted. Every time he says something positive, no one interrupts him, but the minute he starts to criticize the board or the library he is stopped. Then it’s my turn and President Nancy Healy tries to shut me up several times by interrupting, arguing and banging a gavel. After they keep me from making most of my comments they turn to an Orland Park resident named Joe who has never been to a board meeting and is also not allowed to express his disappointment with the terrible internet policy.
What do you call this other than CENSORSHIP?
What a joke these people are. They bluster that those of us who don’t want porn in public libraries are trying to censor adults from hardcore porn or “information” in their words, but they have no problem actually stopping citizens and taxpayers from speaking to them! Watch. This is your government in action.
I’ll never forget watching the manhunt for one teenager after the Boston bombing while militarized storm trooper police raided neighborhoods and dragged people (some of them nearly naked) from their homes with their hands over their heads without warrants. The idea that our police drive armored tanks down suburban streets with gun turrets carrying weapons that not even Saddam Hussein owned made me far more terrified than the idea of a lone bomber on the loose. Watching my fellow Americans be ripped out of their homes without cause and forced to run down the street without looking back while police invaded their lives and privacy was chilling. This was all in the name of safety. I remember at the time I thought, “Oh, the lawsuits are going to be expensive!” but I don’t think anyone sued, or if they did, no one cared enough to report it. It was the definition of illegal search and seizure on television! But instead of outrage, the television was covered in people so thankful to the police for their heroic actions in finding one wounded teen hiding in a boat. (Who, by the way, was actually found by a guy who looked into his backyard and noticed something odd. The tanks and the hysterics didn’t contribute one iota to finding the bomber. Just an alert citizen.)
Since then, I’ve noticed more stories about the militarization of local police and harassment of citizens happening at an alarming rate across this country. Salinas, California just got an armored police vehicle which is disturbing its residents. They don’t understand why their police need such a thing in such a little town. Places like Boulder, Colorado and Preston, Idaho also received these vehicles, disturbing their inhabitants too. Stories of police acting above the law, searching without warrants and abusing their power are on the rise also. There are videos all over YouTube of concealed weapons permit holders being forced to the ground and threatened with a bullet to the head over a legally carried weapon by officers too caught up in their own power to abide by the law. It’s a frightening time to be a private citizen. The government power has reached epic levels and the bloat is infecting even small municipalities and villages.
If you don’t think it could happen to you, let me give you a personal example of what’s been happening to me for the last three months as I contend with a local police force that’s been used as a harassment tool by local elected officials on the library board, of all things.
Since I discovered the open viewing of pornography at the Orland Park Public Library (OPPL) in the Chicago area, many strange things have occurred including assaults on my credibility and character. It began with the bizarre claim that my children weren’t with me in the library and has now progressed to the malicious use of the police to silence me. In this installment I will show how an elected board and public library district is abusing its power to intimidate and quiet all criticism while at the same time refusing to use their authority to go after the real criminals who have committed sex acts in the library.
1. October 8th, 2013: Mary Weimar sends an email to Tim McCarthy, Chief of Police of Orland Park, asking him to investigate two videos on my YouTube channel. One of them is a song I wrote about the 2nd amendment.
Contrast this effort to involve the police for no cause, to the reluctance to call police on October 23, 2008 when a patron reported a man masturbating in the library. Police were not involved on that occasion and in fact, the person who complained was moved to another computer station.
2. October 23, 2013 James Fessler called the police and claimed he was being harassed by phone calls and “annoying emails.”
In order to tie his critics to the phony phone calls and “annoying” emails and bulk up the false reports against library critics with the police, Fessler named Kevin DuJan and me as “subjects” of his concern despite there being no link to either of us and any of the “annoying” things happening to him. One of his complaints detailed that someone had sent this satirical picture to him.
This picture so upset Fessler he felt the need to call the police to report that someone had sent it to him. In the investigation that Fessler insisted the police conduct at considerable cost to the taxpayers over “annoying emails” and amateur prank calls, they found that “John Jenkins” was sending missives from somewhere in Crown Point, Indiana and that other emails were coming from another unnamed man unconnected to DuJan or myself. The “harassing” phone calls were not traced to anyone. Fessler was not charged with making a nuisance call to police.
For contrast, note that on August 20, 2009 police were not notified about a man who was “fully exposed” and masturbating in the computer lab. Further the staff notified the perpetrator that he would be asked to leave on the second occurrence.
On November 18, a large group of people assembled to have their say at the Orland Park Public Library’s board meeting. Most were there because of the library’s policy that allows unfiltered access to any kind of porn or illegal material (including child porn). Not only concerned citizens showed up: three representatives from the American Library Association (ALA) and the president of the Illinois Library Association (ILA) were also there.
The two ALA lawyers who spoke (despite the library’s own policy of only allowing one speaker per group) defended the library’s decision to offer unfiltered access while never mentioning the specifics of what that really means: access to bestiality, identity theft, pedophiles accessing children online via chat rooms, and much more.
Many people have asked how is it possible that public libraries defend men watching porn near children as if the library is some sort of adult theater without dark curtains or an age limit. The ALA’s answer is: “freedom of information.” All information is equal, valid, and necessary for human consumption regardless of age.
It is in the public interest for publishers and librarians to make available the widest diversity of views and expressions, including those that are unorthodox, unpopular, or considered dangerous by the majority. — ALA Freedom to Read statement
The “right to use a library” includes free access to, and unrestricted use of, all the services, materials, and facilities the library has to offer. Every restriction on access to, and use of, library resources, based solely on the chronological age, educational level, literacy skills, or legal emancipation of users violates Article V. – ALA Interpretation of the Library Bill of Rights
These documents are made in the ALA’s Office for Intellectual Freedom (OIF), a name that evokes Randian flair. One wonders what these people actually think of unfiltered porn in libraries because they never mention it in public. Luckily, I happen to have an email from an ALA Listserv group, written by ALA councilor at large Mark Rosenzweig, that answers that question.
We’re as American as apple pie. And we should say so. Loud and clear. The more progessive [sic] wing of the profession should intelligently counter the “erotophobia [sic]‘. The worst thing in life, even for a kid, is NOT exposure to the image of naked people, or even people screwing, blowing, licking, humping, having sex with animals, etc. (except, for legal-and perhaps ethical-reasons, child erotica, so ill-defined that it can include the work of the world-renowned photopher [sic] Sally Mann.)
If that’s not bad enough, Rosenzweig continues,
attempts to contain the curiosity of kids is bad for children. But so-called pornography? WHERE DOES IT RATE? nowhere…
I would guess that Rosenzweig never studied the effects of pornography on children or adults:
“Pornography distorts the natural development of personality. If the early stimulus is pornographic photographs, the adolescent can be conditioned to become aroused through photographs. Once this pairing is rewarded a number of times, it is likely to become permanent. The result to the individual is that it becomes difficult for the person to seek out relations with appropriate person.”–Jerry Bergman, Ph.D., “The Influence of Pornography on Sexual Development: Three Case Histories”
Rosenzweig is also director of the Reference Center for Marxist Studies. His cavalier attitude about exposing children to sex makes more sense now. Fellow Marxist Antonio Gramsci believed that creating the ultimate state required the takeover of “mediating institutions” that would separate an individual from the power of the all-knowing government. These institutions are better known as family and religion. Marxists seek to redefine the culture to gain political power. What better way to capture the undeveloped minds of the young than with pornography that separates them from their families and their religions?
Lack of access to information can be harmful to minors. Librarians and library governing bodies have a public and professional obligation to ensure that all members of the community they serve have free, equal, and equitable access to the entire range of library resources regardless of content, approach, format, or amount of detail. This principle of library service applies equally to all users, minors as well as adults.-ALA Interpretation of the Bill of Rights
In the never ending soap opera that is my involvement with the Orland Park Public Library regarding the open viewing of pornography and sex acts that go unreported to police, here is another doozy. Yesterday I published the email from Director Mary Weimar to the police chief asking him to investigate a song I wrote three years ago (instead of asking him to investigate all the creepy men trolling her library.) Here is his response. Did I mention this man is a national hero?
How many more times do you think Director Mary Weimar is going to need to be schooled by the Orland Park Police on what actual “protected speech” is? (For anyone counting, this is now twice in 28 days.)
Just as a reminder, the original email the director sent to the police on October 7, 2013 about investigating me was a mere 3 days after my letter of complaint about seeing open pornography in her library. Not once did she reach out to me, a mother and library patron, or call or contact me to find out how she could best understand my concern (even though I provided her with my address and phone number and email address.) The first thing she did was have someone dig up all my social media accounts, find a 3 year old video about gun rights and turn it over to the police. Does that give you any indication of what kind of person the Orland Park Library has at its helm?
After weeks of denials and outright lies told to the media by the Orland Park Public Library (OPPL) about the severity of their problem with people viewing porn openly and committing crimes, the dam is beginning to break.
Last week library spokesperson Bridget Bittman gave an interview to WLS-AM’s Bruce Wolf and Dan Proft that did not go very well for her. In it, she said something very important at the 2:12 mark:
“That doesn’t mean that adults, whether it’s women or men, are coming to the library to access this type of information [pornography].”
So the library claims that I didn’t see what I thought I saw and people don’t access porn in their library.
Curious as to the kinds of emails zinging through the library about me, I FOIA’d any email communications containing my name and found an email from board member Diane Jennings (who on November 4th stuck her finger in my face outside the library and shouted, “Liar, Liar, Liar!”)
In the following email, Jennings admits the library purposefully separated the computer labs so that “pervs” (her word) can access their “filth” (her word) elsewhere. After admitting to this problem, Jennings makes light of pedophilia and child kidnapping by making a terrible argument about lingerie displays in department stores that isn’t even close to the hardcore porn in her library. Unbelievably, this woman is a former attorney.
When you work for the public on publicly funded computers and are issued a publicly funded email address, it’s always wise to keep in mind that anything you type and send can be obtained (and republished) by anyone at anytime under the Freedom of Information Act, a law meant to keep our government transparent.
According to Jennings, “filth” is accessed on library computers by “perverts”. This is in direct contradiction to Bittman’s claim on WLS-AM that neither men or women access that kind of information in the library. You can see from the tone of this email that OPPL representative Diane Jennings has little care for the concerns of parents and would rather attack a mother of two instead of address the problem.
To clarify her claim that I could have used lobby computers, I asked two staffers if there was any other choice than taking my children to the adult computer lab and both said no. No one mentioned any computers available to families in the lobby as Jennings claims.
Since my complaint, they have had to allow for “family computer use” in the children’s lab which is a good idea but still does not address the open viewing of pornography in a building full of children.
Further, more evidence surfaced in the form of former employee and candidate for the board in the last election, Linda Zec’s essay on her experience with porn in OPPL. It’s too good to chop up here, read the whole thing. The truth is stranger than fiction.
It is now clear that at least one library board member was absolutely 100% aware of pornography accessed in the adult computer lab and she doesn’t see it as a problem (or at least no more harmful than underwear on hangers.) Is there any hope of communicating common sense to people who equate hardcore pornography in the open and public masturbation with lingerie displays in department stores?
After days of dodging questions and skirting the issue to every reporter in Chicago, America’s last and best form of media (besides new media online) AM radio finally cracked the heart of the Orland Park Library porn scandal wide open. Unlike television news that can manipulate and edit a story into oblivion, live radio interviews still retain that hard journalism feel. Bruce Wolf and Dan Proft of WLS-AM got Bridget Bittman, library spokesperson, to finally admit the reports I have posted here are real. After saying on television, “there have never been sex crimes in the library,” she had to admit to “7 incidents [of] inappropriate behavior.” There are two inaccuracies here. There are actually 12 instances, 7 were reported to police, 5 were not. And “inappropriate” isn’t the word for what should be called “illegal sex acts” including several incidents of public masturbation, indecent exposure, stalking, harassment and viewing child porn. She only admits to one incident of indecent exposure and the child porn.
It’s interesting to note that in all the television reports no reporter held Bittman to the fire over the unreported incidents of sex acts even though they were in possession of the documents. Neither did any newspaper editor who had the documents mention the nature of the reports and what is in them, failing to report the true horror of this investigation intentionally. The truth no longer matters to old media and as a result it is dying.
On Monday, November 4th, the Orland Park Public Library’s limits to free speech were finally uncovered. They draw the line when anyone says critical things about their policies to the public in the form of flyers they deem “damaging” enough to call the police. This was surprising considering over the years there were many incidents of actual reported crimes that didn’t warrant this action. Considering their open policy to allow any adult to view any kind of pornography claiming first amendment protection, one would think that protection would be extended to members of the public disagreeing peacefully (especially because they have a large outdoor “freedom plaza” complete with American flag and large open pedestrian walkways that can accommodate a large number of Americans exercising their rights.)
Police were pulled away from duty serving the public to explain the first amendment to library officials who claimed to be constitutional experts. Once they had reeducated the confused library administration, officers quickly returned to their work.
Well, it’s official. I’ve been sent to the Facebook “naughty chair” for 12 hours. As I write this I’m still not able to access either one of my pages, personal or writer page, and it’s 1:46 am and I calculate that there are 14 minutes left in my punishment. That Mark Zuckerberg means it when he says it’s going to be a whole 12 hours.
What did I do, pray tell, that sent me, head hanging, to the corner with all the hate speechers and porn-posters? I got into an argument with a librarian who hates censorship. So she did what any logically challenged person would do and reported me to Facebook so they would censor me.
Unfortunately for Brittany Staszak, children’s librarian at Glencoe Public Library, actual laws (you know, the ones Congress makes without Mark Zuckerberg’s input), allow a person to re-post statements made in a public forum like Facebook or YouTube or anywhere else on the internet! So welcome to your 15 minutes of fame, Ms. Staszak. I hope it’s exciting for you! (Or at least as exciting as pushing the “report” button all day.) Here’s the exchange that got me thrown out of social media.
And then she reported me and made sure I was not able to access all the information in the form of media and internet access for the next 12 hours (actually we’re at 14 and counting now). Staszak wants to have her cake and eat it too by posting her ridiculous ideas in a public forum but at the same time pretending no one else has a right to comment on how crazy her ideas are.
As reading habits shift from printed to digital ink, public libraries are struggling to raise awareness of their digital offerings.
The introduction of tablets and dedicated e-book readers has changed the way we read. Now, you’re just as likely to find fellow commuters or waiting-room dwellers reading an e-book as a physical one.
While our libraries are busy trying to keep up with the rise of e-books, it turns out their patrons don’t know there are e-books available for lending.
Some 62% of respondents to the Pew Research Center’s Internet and American Life Project’s latest library survey said they didn’t know if their library offered e-book lending.
In reality, three-quarters of public libraries in the U.S. offer this service. The problem is, not enough people are taking advantage of it, or even know about it.
The ebook that I’m reading now from the library: