I know exactly what pictures you mean and they have absolutely nothing to do with child pornography. They are pictures depicting how incredibly wrong things can go in the world.

She is running from her village, because it has accidentally been napalmed by "friendly" forces. She has also been burned by said napalm.

Trang Bang 1972 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

Hi Guys

It's been a long time since I have graced this hollowed forum, at this stage I just want to voice an opinion or two:

Here we go, first I believe I know what pornography is when I see it and I also know what art is but I do not know the point where art becomes pornography or vice versa. So, I believe, like most normal people, that there can be a fine line between the two but have difficulty in distinguishing that line.

Second, there are some people who regard all forms of human nudity as pornographic and there is no reasoning with such people.

Now my main point, the little girl from Vietnam, whose village was napalmed, I believe that under current western legislation it is highly unlikely that such a picture would have been published. After all, she was definitely under aged, around about 8 - 12, she was nude and in obvious pain, the skin on her back was hanging off in tatters. However, the current laws would have censored the pictures of this girl and so the full horror of the Vietnam war, and it's affect on the ordinary Vietnamese people, would have been hidden from the western world.

Finally, I would like to say that I personally do not believe in censorship as a rule, simply because governments and powerful organisations use it as a tool to hide their illegal and morally dubious actions and as an aid to promoting their own brand of propaganda.

However, I do believe that all vulnerable people, whether young, old, disabled, etc., should be protected from unscrupulous people exploiting them. And, unfortunately, one area of protecting vulnerable people is through the blunt, catch all instrument of censorship.


UK Bob

And another titled 'Terror of War' Nick Ut Pulitzer Prize Winning Napalm Girl Vietnam War Wire Photo | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

Side-comment: They said the South Vietnamese accidentally bombed the wrong village. Do you really think they would not know their own territory and which village was which? Easy to shift the blame. Every war the USA has been in, they have made similar errors. But perhaps it was not them this time.

Off-topic: I was looking through the series of photos about Viet Nam during that period. I spent 2 months over there after just completing my first year's university study in the Vietnamese language. The Southerners speak very differently to those in the north. Many different words and very different accented vowels. Much of my communication in the south was via pencil and paper, whereas in Hanoi I could understand them reasonably easily and vice-versa. My language course taught 95% northern Vietnamese words, which is the official version of the language. I notice their river boats have not changed at all since the 1960's lol.

Had South Viet Nam won the war your Vietnamese language classes my have had a southern rather than a northern "twang"

The photo mentioned was an atrocity, accident or not. I served 13 months in a combat infantry battalion in central RVN,1968-70. I witnessed child pornography (atrocities) commited by Viet Cong forces upon villagers who had cooperated with US and ARVN forces. We returned to the village during these actions and photographed these incidents before we killed these criminals. The photos were to be used as evidence of the atrocities, but alas we left the country having failed the people with the " southern twang".

I will not show these pictures nor portray the atrocities vividly in writing. I will not attempt to publish the story deemed pornographic or not. I cannot afford to take the chance.













I am not about to show you pictures of these atrocities (child pornography),
but I could vividly explain what the photos depicted and what I saw. Either way my novel will never be published. At this let date I cannot afford it.

vividly portray what took place

Is there an International Law regarding ages etc. e.g. Uk can get married at 16 with parents consent, therefore that person is legally entitled to do all things.
Is standard nude modelling at 16 legal ok but not porn ?
What about parents permitted nude photos of their kids ?
Can anyone clear up even one or more of these points ?
Thanks Powerspan

You can photograph your nude kids, but you better keep the pics to yourself!
If you are legally married in a country that legalizes marriages at 16 do what consenting adults do ,but do it at home with the shades drawn.

In the U.S. it is unlawful to film/photograph nude persons under the age of 18, even if they are your own children. Possession of such images is unlawful, no matter how you came to possess them. Parents who have photographed their children while playing in the bathtub, or a naked toddler's backside while doing something silly, (i.e., "innocent" photos), have been threatened with prosecution. Unfortunately, what is seen as innocent by some, is a turn-on to perverted others.

Even non-photographic artwork can be charged as pornography if it depicts under-age persons in a state of nudity. I imagine that, under certain circumstances, even stick-figure drawings may be ajudged pornographic.

I am not sure if an emancipated minor, such as a married 17-year old, is considered an adult under the porno statutes. (Restrictions against under-age drinking and voting are not relieved by emancipation!)