Response to Dishonest Hitpiece Flyer Being Posted Downtown

Smear Campaign Against Ian

Haters gonna hate, and lie.

In another smear campaign against me, local haters have concocted yet another dishonest attack flyer and littered it all over downtown Keene. This unsigned, un-cited flyer accuses me of using my radio show to propagate the opinion that, “children as young or younger than six years old have the right and ability to consent to sexual acts with adults” and further claims that I have said that “children have the right to consent, and parents, the community and the state should not intervene”.

Those are the rumors, now here are the facts: In the video made by a local hater from clips of a discussion on my radio show from years ago, it is a caller who asks if I support sex with a six-year old. To which I say twice that sex with children is reprehensible, but that what people do is none of my business. Somehow that conversation gets spun as me supporting sex with children, which I do not, and never have. Here’s a much more detailed discussion about age of consent that explains why I don’t consider what people do in their homes any of my business.

Even if a child could somehow be mentally ready for sex, they are not physically ready for it, so it’s not okay in my book. So, no, I don’t support sex with children, but I don’t consider teens who decide they are ready for sex to be children. Some people do consider teenagers to be children, and I find that to be insulting to young people. It’s also a view that doesn’t hold up against history, where many people consented to sex and marriage at ages as young as 13. Nor does it hold up if you bother to actually read the definition of “child”, which is a person between birth and puberty.

So while I don’t believe people should have sex with children, I do support young people who are physically able to have sex being able to decide when they are mentally ready to be adults and take on responsibility for their actions, including sex.

Many people are very uncomfortable around the idea of sex in general, as they come from the belief that sex is bad and naughty. Rather than have honest conversations about age of consent, they jump to extremes, make up lies, and call names, because everyone must have as repressive of views as they do, so anyone who doesn’t must support sex with children.

I support young people being able to emancipate themselves, not sex with children. I support each individual being judged by their actions and words, not arbitrary ages. Government “statutory rape” laws have destroyed countless innocent lives and are an insult to real rape victims.

Now you can subscribe to Free Keene via email!

Don't miss a single post!


  1. Thank you for stating your view on this issue! It’s pretty fuwnny that the woman who posted these flyers, Jenn Schmidt, actually attacked a 10 year old with a knife, but then comes at you with this shit!

  2. One question. One thing in the flyer which conflicts with my understanding of your position is that “there is nothing that parents can do about it”. Would you say that parents who shot someone they believed were molesting their child would be any of your business? Would you take any action to prevent parents from defending their children?

  3. It’s none of my business what parents do. I am inclined to not get involved.

  4. Thank you for stating your point of view. Whether people agree or disagree with a person, it’s important not to frame their point of view dishonestly otherwise a discussion is really being disguised as an attack.

  5. Ian Bernard doing more damage control. What you seem to be missing the definition between a child and an adult. A child is anyone under the age of 18. You have made so many statements saying you support the sexual relationship between a child and an adult. You had a sexual relationship with a 14 year old child. Everyone in Keene knows that. Now you have the supposed “supposed minister” supporting your statements. You are imposing and speaking for children saying that it’s alright. The parent’s of these children and the law say it isn’t right.

  6. another unhelpful peice by Ian… with each subsequent post you dig your hole deeper

  7. Libel and defamation is a crime.

    Consult an attorney asap.

  8. I have many conflicting thoughts about this complex issue. I did listen to the conversation that was posted peronly thing that I believe is left out of is the physiological and psychological effects and brain development. Although I would agree that there is a very big difference between sex with a child and with a teenager (and the age and developmental difference of the other person), there are some complex considerations. Also, if a child is made to have sex with said parents (or with their permission or force) and it’s none of your business, who should protect said child, or is everyone to ignore this behavior?

  9. It should be noted that Ian is being intellectually dishonest in this piece. Out of one side of his mouth, he says the flyer is
    dishonest, then out of the other side of his mouth, he dishonestly portrays what is said in the flyer.

    Here is the example from above:

    Flyer: “children as young or younger than six years old have the right and ability to consent to sexual acts with adults”

    Ian from above: “Somehow that conversation gets spun as me supporting sex with children.”

    Where does it say in the flyer Ian supports sex with children? Of course, anyone who is HONEST can see that it clearly does not. It says he believes young children can consent, which he does. Let us further isolate his words with regard to CONSENT and put the record straight about his very disturbing views:

    Ian from the video: “My belief system in regards to young people, or you know, very young people and their ability or inability to consent to sexual activity, I say that they can…” ~Ian Freeman

    He then contradicts his own stated beliefs by saying:

    Ian from above: “Even if a child could somehow be mentally ready for sex, they are not physically ready for it, so it’s not okay in my book.”

    But then he also says… (and note the word *might*)

    Ian from the video: “I didn’t say they should have sex with adults. I might find that reprehensible but it’s none of my damn business. Personally, I think that young people can make decisions for themselves.”

    In other words, Ian has done this to himself by not clearly repudiating the original caller’s hypothetical in the video. In fact, he says “very young people” can consent, which supports the caller’s assertion regarding six year old children. And still, we really don’t know what he truly believes because he contradicts himself when it’s expedient.

  10. Yes Victim Yes Crime

    Defamation lawsuit against the perpetrator is a no-brainer here.

  11. @Jumping Jacks: No, that’s the definition of a “minor,” not a “child.” Ian used the correct medical definition. Since you claim to be a medical professional, one would expect you to know such a thing. Caught in another one of your lies, eh?

  12. More blah blah blah coming from the draccc and flinty show. I was wondering when flinty the sicko scumbag was going to show up. Supporting Ian again on his delusional ideas of consent, eh flinty just to pick on someone’s profession.
    This deviant flinty is the one that said “people are attacking Tasker ” before he has had a fair trial. Wow! He also had drugs to sell to possible minors too, but flinty is to blind with anti- government rage that he doesn’t see that children lives and safety are being threatened . Shame on you. The wheels on the Free Keene bus are falling off, when are you going to jump?

  13. your post gave the flyer more views than it ever would have had;by far….dontcha think

  14. ok i read more…. everything was….fairly tolerable except for the “naughty” part which was…goofy…that paragraph
    i just think you should get off the subject lol

  15. Flint – It’s semantics. You usual rant means nothing as usual.

  16. I submitted this once already, but it never showed up and I’ve since seen other comments appear. Maybe it was because I block javascript and cookies by default, so I’m trying it again with your site white listed to allow them.

    >> Many people are very uncomfortable around the idea of sex in general, as they come from the belief that sex is bad and naughty.

    This belief is not founded in The Bible, not that you claim as much. Maybe some of your supporters should take a closer look at the word of God; they might be surprised to discover how in-line it is with some of their beliefs as expressed over this issue. The only part of your argument with which I take issue is that someone of such-and-such an age has “the right to consent.” A right is another way of saying “an opinion that I think should be enforced by law,” which seems like a strange thing for an anarchist to say. I’m not sure if you call yourself an anarchist, but I know a lot of your listeners do. Also, nobody of any age can consent, because consent is a myth. Cheers!

  17. Daniel P. Barron – You asserted that “a right is another way of saying ‘an opinion that I think should be enforced by law.'”
    Maybe for some people. Just because one believes something to be an objective right, does not mean that one must necessarily advocate enforcing it by law. I am anarchist, and I do support objective rights, and adhere to the Non-Aggression Principle; but I absolutely do not advocate enforcing the NAP upon others in relationships to which I am not party. I will defend myself (and my loved ones, with their consent) against NAP violations, but I do not support the collective enforcement of the NAP though a government (or any other means).

  18. romeo and juliet is widely considered to be one of the most romantic stories of all time. she was 13. nuff said.

  19. @Bsizzle: Calling out liars for being liars is not the same as supporting anyone else. I’ll call out liars, regardless of whether they are speaking in favor of or in opposition to positions I support. That’s how honest people behave. You should attempt to get some experience with that; it might be a novelty for you.

    Jacks’ repeated lies about his credentials deserve to be mocked.

    And, as has become the common refrain these days, your attempts to call others “sick” are meaningless, since you support that rapist Chambers. You’re in no position to make claims about others, given that.

  20. @Jumping Jacks: You do realize that, since you’re the one who attempted to argue about the definition given in the article, your attempt to say that things which are “just semantics” should be treated as meaningless means that your post was the meaningless one, right?

  21. Hey flinty the sicko scumbag, prove in any of my posts where I approve of what Chambers did. I have asked you in the past, yet I get no reply back, so calling me a lair here, just proves that you are one for sure. It’s kinda of funny that I’ve been PREACHING here that the FBI, IRS, local and state authorities will be coming for your friends here, and time and time again I was called out for being a “liar”! Who’s the liar now, flinty?
    Sincerely, Bsizzle
    P.s thank god for the first day of spring, a chance to weeding out these deviant keeniacs!

  22. Well it did seem that Bsizzle wife jenn was stalking a child… thats on Keene nh court records

  23. That was a fictional story, you fucking moron.

  24. The law appears to be closing in on Keene’s most despised narcissist and all-around shit-bird Ian Bernard. I would assume an indictment is not far behind.

    This is something the good people of Keene have been looking forward to for a long, long time.

  25. Here’s a simple test to determine if the flyer is libelous or not: Is any of it not true?

  26. Hey ex-con: How do you know it was Jenn Schmidt who posted the flyers? Talk about defaming someone.

  27. Couldn’t of said it any better, Eddie.

  28. @Bsizzle: You go on non-stop about how much you support Chambers, you sick freak.

  29. Post a screen shot flinty the sicko scumbag about “how I go on non stop about how much I support Tasker? Where is your buddy draccc, to support you in your quest to prove me wrong. You’ve got nothing except for the tiny little balls that you hold all night hoping they will get bigger with every smear campaign of a post you shoot my way. Now I’m not under your skin, I’m ripping your guts from the inside out! Hee-hee!

  30. Screen shot a post of me supporting Chambers also. I’m waiting, flinty the sicko scumbag.

  31. So you’re still completely oblivious as to the purpose of this simple lesson Flint has been trying to teach to you, Shylock dear? How on earth can that be the case, lamb? You’re not having trouble with any other subjects as well, are you dear? Maybe you should have your mommy hire you a tutor to help you?

  32. It’s like shooting fish in a barrel.
    Draccc, are you going to answer my question about your grandchildren in the FSP? In light of the downfall of your deviant friends here, do your grandchildren approve of your support with Ian Bernard and the rest of the keeniacs? Where is flinty draccc? Is he trying to wait for his balls to drop to man up and admit he supports Tasker, all the while feverishly claiming that I support this fucknut Chambers? Enlightened me, please?

  33. I’m sorry that you’re so upset about not understanding this lesson, Shylock dear, but I’m only trying to help you. Unfortunately, it’s been a very difficult task to teach you even the simplest lessons, since you’ve already convinced yourself that you already know everything. That’s why you enjoy using the world “delusional” as much as you do, isn’t it dear? It’s funny to me that you’re always intimating that you have knowledge that others lack, yet you’ve never submitted anything here that demonstrates superior knowledge of… well anything at all. Not even once. I wonder why that is, lamb?

  34. Eddie – If your position is that a story about a romantic relationship between a 13 year old and an older male should be accepted because it is fiction and no one was harmed, I appreciate that. While I still think your comment about prison rape in the other thread was despicable (assuming you are the same Eddie), what you’ve posted here just goes to show that nobody is 100% hater or 100% authoritarian. Despite whatever personal animosity you may feel toward Ian or Free Keene, I hope you are open to considering the benefits of freedom in other situations too.

  35. You’re inclined to get sexually involved with 14 year olds because you’re not mature enough to handle a relationship with someone your own age. Do you know what they do to pedophiles in prison? Pedophiles are at the bottom of the pecking order, they’re beaten, threatened and robbed. You and your anarchist friends trample the freedom you enjoy but you’re going to learn to appreciate freedom when you end up behind bars and victimized by the worst people you’ve ever come across. I can’t wait.

  36. Bsizzle – If your comment about shooting fish in a barrel is meant to support gun rights, I appreciate that. Nobody is 100% authoritarian. I encourage you to explore your natural pro-freedom inclinations. You might find that you like some other freedoms too, and then you might find the Free Keene folks aren’t so bad after all.

  37. So if the flier ISN’T trying to say Ian supports having sex with children, then, uh, what is the point? Why post it? Do you post other fliers informing people of what your neighbors’ beliefs are on different topics?

    If so, or if Ian was the first but you are open to making more, what do I need to do to get you to make a flier about ME? If we engage in some dialogue, we can probably figure out some beliefs of mine that you find dangerous or offensive.

    It’d be cool to be able to tell my grandkids that back in the day I was so despised for spreading the message of freedom that people posted hateful fliers of me around town. Give us something to talk about while we sit around and I show them my old sex worker ad photos!

  38. A noble sentiment Jolene, but I’d argue it’s not a no-brainer… Walter Block makes a good case that since you don’t own your reputation, you don’t have any property rights in it, and therefore do not have a legal claim against anyone who damages it, and even blackmail should be legal.

    Since you’re encouraging Ian to sue, I’m guessing that you are not one of the anti-Free Keene haters, which means there’s probably a much better chance that if I reference the concept of something being slimy and morally reprehensible without rising to the level of being an injury for which the perpetrator ought to be held liable (e.g. using below-the-belt tactics to try to demonize a guy like Ian who’s working hard to improve his community), you’ll understand.

  39. Bob – I’m torn between disgust at your sick eagerness to see other people suffer, and dark amusement at the rich irony of you accusing Ian and other anarchists of not appreciating freedom. (I’m assuming since you’re voicing your desire to see him beaten and robbed in jail for his free speech that you are a raging statist, but if I’m wrong and you actually do appreciate freedom yourself and this case is a rare exception for you, please let me know.)

  40. That’s just a common government definition of a “child” (different governments have different definitions). Nature says 14, being past puberty, is a teenager or young adult. I don’t know about you, but I find nature more reliable than government.

  41. Draccc, you can stop now. Thanks for answering my questions.

  42. “bwizzle ” was very clear about Supporting chambers.. which was hard to understand… he use to argue in favor of chambers… for some reason

  43. Dude, anyone who falls over themselves justifying sex with minors under the age of consent is pretty fucking suspect.

    I know you and your buds like to hook up with underage girls. Maybe you’re not breaking any laws doing so, but it’s not part of the libertarian philosophy. It’s what you get off on. It’s gross as hell to equate this with Free Keene.

  44. Ian has tried so hard over the years to become a “public celebrity” – he succeeded. Now anything “published” about him is subject to the more difficult defamation standard known as Sullivan v. N.Y. Times, the famous SCOTUS opinion…. The Freekeeners are so good with their knowledge of law, so they say, they should be quite familiar with this case…………..

    And of course, the Truth is an absolute defense to a charge of defamation……………………….

  45. Whoever posted this slanderous garbage is very likely who framed you guys by hacking your wireless netwprl ans downloaded the reprehensible child pornography they are accusing you of. How pathetic.

  46. In the source material Shakespeare built his play on, Romeo “had a tender chin” i.e. hadn’t grown a beard yet… so he was also somewhere between like 12 and 18. Not 34. The Capulets and Montagues probably would have worked together to string up a 34 year old Romeo.

Care to comment?