The liberal Boston Globe is troubled about   a 28-year-old man in Middleton who has "molested" over 250 boys.

But are they really concerned? Their liberal friend, WGBH, is telling the story of a "romance" between a 29-year-old man and a 15-year-old boy.

So we must wonder: Did the man in Middleton "molest" the boys or did he "help" them? What do these liberals really think?

Is there a difference between the 29-year-old on the television show and the 28-year-old in Middleton? And if so, what is it?

If a man and a boy can have a sexual "romance" as WGBH tells us, should such a man limit his attention to only one boy? If this "learning experience" will help the boy mature with love and understanding, the man should not allow just one boy to monopolize his attention.

The man should (and the research shows that he does), spread his "love" in many directions, to many different boys.

So, is the Globe really concerned about what happened in Middleton, or do they agree with their liberal friends at WGBH? Are we just going through a charade?  Or is the Globe truly confused?

We know that the Globe is not concerned about what happened at "Fistgate," even though "romances" will undoubtedly result where children from 14- to 21-years-of-age receive graphic sexual instruction together.

But more important, this type of conduct goes on all the time with the help of the schools of Massachusetts.

As just one example, we revealed last November that young school boys were being offered $25 and a free "Weekend Retreat" if they would go and discuss sex in groups with other students up to 25-years-of-age. This offer was from the Boston Alliance of Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgendered Youth, which receives money from the state and advises Gay/Straight Alliances in the high schools across the state. The invitation was delivered to the high schools in the name of "education" and "health."

However, the Boston Globe and the rest of the establishment, including the Governor and everyone in the legislature, were not interested in that information ­ because they all know it is happening and they don’t appear to care.

So we must all wonder.

Should we have concern over what happened at Middleton? Or was it really okay what the man did and must we now endure the spectacle of those "homophobes" acting-up again?

Bay Windows Columnist Calls on Homosexuals to Repudiate NAMBLA

The homosexual weekly, Bay Windows, recently published a column by David Valdes Greenwood, a frequent contributor to the Boston Phoenix, that applauded the lawsuit brought by the Curley family against the North American Man-Boy Love Association.  The Curley’s young son was molested and murdered by pedophiles.

"I know that any critique of NAMBLA I write will prompt criticism from far left field," he says and notes, "I have yet to see a gay organization actively pursue an end to this terrible group."

Greenwood might start at the Phoenix. When we criticized one of their columnists, Michael Bronski, for saying, "Gay-bashing under the guise of child protection will never go away until we as a culture can discuss the lives and needs of children openly and honestly ­ and include recognition of their sexuality, freedom, and autonomy," Phoenix columnist Dan Kennedy called it "a vicious smear."

But it is clear to anyone who reads Bronski’s work (such as his book, The Pleasure Principle) that Bronski is exactly the kind of anything-goes, sex-first activist who will not condemn NAMBLA. In a 1995 article for the Harvard Gay and Lesbian Review, Bronski wrote, "If the religious right is going to dwell on all aspects of our sexuality ­ such as S-M, NAMBLA, drag, and cruising­ we have to have solid, pro-gay, pro-sex answers. Simply saying, ‘Not all gay men are drag queens’ or ‘NAMBLA isn’t about homosexuality, it’s about pedophilia,’ isn’t enough."

If anyone who calls attention to the fact that the homosexual movement has a pro-pedophilia component is going to be subject to attack from the Phoenix, Mr. Greenwood will have to wait a long time for the condemnation he seeks.

Elian

When I heard about the Elian raid, I immediately thought back to 1965. In that year, the ultraliberals in Washington announced they were going to drag teenage boys from their homes in America and send them to Vietnam. I could not believe my ears.

I hadn’t been so sad since then — until Elian.

I wasn’t upset in 1965 because we were on the "wrong" side of the fight in Vietnam (which is what the liberals would say later to the boys they had sent there to kill and to die). The problem was that our teenagers cannot solve all the problems of the world.

(If anyone wants to quarrel with my statement that our teenage boys were "dragged" from their homes, I  wish they would talk to me about the Army stockade at Indiantown Gap, Pennsylvania, where I was a guard for a short time a few years before on my way to Korea. All of those young men had been arrested for going back home and were now in that prison. It was not a "fun" type of place to be. Those boys had literally been "dragged" from their homes by the FBI or the police. There is no other word to describe it.)

I thought about Vietnam when I heard what had happened to Elian.

My eyes grew moist as I thought of the terror he had gone through because of the politics of appeasing Cuba. It was noontime before I could go back and watch the television.

Just as the Massachusetts public never understood, until years later, what a terrible thing it was to send those boys to Vietnam, they don’t understand about Elian either. (Mostly because of the unusually heavy propaganda they have been fed by the Boston Globe and its owner, the New York Times, and most of the other media.)

They now understand that something was "wrong" about Vietnam but they still don’t understand what it was. We can only hope that they understand what was "wrong" about Elian before it’s too late.

They’ve all forgotten how Harry Truman led us into Korea in an attempt to stop the Russians and Chinese from subjugating more people. They’ve forgotten how John Kennedy brought us to the brink of nuclear war with Russia in order to stop them from putting missiles in Cuba. They’ve forgotten how Cuba exported war and death into Central America until Russia collapsed in the 1980s.

Maybe times have changed and now is the time that we should start trading again with Cuba.

But what a way to announce it!

This was all done for the benefit of the Archer Daniels Midland company (as we explained in great detail in our last issue) which wants to build a food refinery in Cuba. All of the players, including the lawyer who managed everything, Gregory Craig, and the National Council of Churches, are admitted agents of ADM, the company that was convicted in 1988 of criminal antitrust violations and is the largest contributor to both parties.

It’s now documented through email messages that the White House was in close, probably daily, contact with the Cuban government. These messages show that the INS decided to return Elian to Cuba and then sought to find a legal justification for its actions. Initially, if you will remember, they had said that the question of custody should be resolved by a family court in Florida. On January 1, it said in a press release, "We have discussed this case with State of Florida officials who have confirmed that the issue of legal custody must be decided by its state court."

Even Alan Dershowitz and Laurence Tribe, both liberal professors at Harvard Law School, were shocked by the raid. If the average person of Massachusetts is not outraged when over 100 armed, federal agents are sent to a private home where people are gassed, we have reached a sad state.

If the people of Massachusetts have no memory of the thousands of young American men who gave their lives to prevent the spread of Communism (all under the leadership of the liberals) and they are quick to send a young boy back to a bankrupt Communist state without any thought, then why did our young men work so hard and give so much, including their lives, to save freedom?