Polygamist Pedophiles and Papal Pontifications by deadlockvictim

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

Finn

For distinction between puberty, adulthood and marriage made across cultures, see here: http://www.jstor.org/pss/2798730

***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, April 19, 2008 1:57 PM

That's all well and good folks - but it does not address the issue of how to lawfully deal with that problem within the rules that the authorities MUST obey in exchange for their legitimacy.

Because without that legitimacy, they're just another gang with thugs and guns.

It also does not address that in this case parental rights have been terminated not only without evidence of a crime, but without even the accusation of one, simply on the basis of religion and guilt by association.
(Emphasis added, once again)

That being said, you wanna see WHERE a large problem with any kind of enforcement comes from ?

This is a direct clip of the FBI rep (who's boss, although present, *refused* to testify) being grilled for.. cutting personnel, skimming off funds to a fraud complaint office, being unable/unwilling to address more than 2% of confirmed complaints, as well as admitting they have nowhere near the total budget claimed by their press releases.

http://www.brightcove.tv/title.jsp?title=1267554613&channel=823449575&
lineup=-1

The ambivalence and apathy of the FBI in regards to this program is damn near legendary amongst anyone involved in this entire issue.

Then there is the USDOJ March Audit.

http://www.usdoj.gov/oig/reports/plus/a0818/final.pdf

This is a 3.28MB PDF wherein it's noted that the FBI quite clearly did not follow through, reporting sites and hosts "shut down" from the moment they issued a subpeano, and at no time actually followed up and attempted any enforcement beyond that, while also indicating their IC3 dept (referenced above) simply writes a referral for local offices and enforcement agencies with no followup whatsoever.

USDOJ is currently pretty pissed off, as they have been handed a zero-enforcement shell game by the FBI with no way of knowing whether or not any of those cases have ever actually been investigated whatsoever.

This was a critical factor in the overkill response, understandable but unacceptable, since it violated policy, established procedure, and the law itself.
(not to mention both the FBI and USDOJ's use of force guidelines)

Normally I wouldn't share such details, but obviously some folk wanna do something about it, well, if you want it in the hands of Government Authorities, how about stepping up and having a chat with your legislators about making them actually do the job - and cutting them enough budget and personnel to do more than just put on a pretty show.

If y'all wanna get serious about stuff like this, I can show you how and where, but you gotta be willing to put your money, and your neck, on the line for it, cause you'd be pushing folks who can push back pretty hard, and have little respect for the regs and rules.

And instilling that respect by whatever means it takes should be your FIRST priority, else you'll be creating a monster that will turn on you, and damned quickly.

-Frem

It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, April 19, 2008 2:19 PM

Quick update, apparently some of the children in question may be legally Canadian, and thus the Canadian AG Wally Oppal has been advised.

General reaction to the idea of those kids being fed into the Texas Foster Care System...
"Like hell.."

They have their own issues with a community in B.C. from what I have been told, and I have no doubt their influence is quite limited, but an informational packet on the known dangers of the Texas Foster Care System is en route to them at this time.

Currently taking the whole underage pregnant girls tale with the same grain of salt wisely taken on the supposed caller - given the lies and distortions fed to us by the media, although the possibility is acknowledged, we'd like solid evidence of both pregnancy and age, and in THOSE cases action may be warranted, but how to do so when all of the evidence obtained was via an illegal search in the first place ?

Here's a chance for Hero to offer his two cents when it's actually wanted for once - under Texas law, what gets thrown out and what sticks, by the book ?

-F

Here's a copy of the affadavits for the warrant(s)
http://web.gosanangelo.com/pdf/FLDSaffidavit.pdf
Which have subsequently been proven to be based on false information and are thus, not valid.

And now the State is saying "Oh well, that doesn't matter" - and refusing to even bother verifying the initial claims.
(Which hints to me that they DID know they were false at the time.)

Tell me folks, how would YOU like to be the victim of such a fishing expedition, hmm ?

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, April 19, 2008 2:28 PM

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

If a caller claims to police she is being raped or sexually abused I think police have the duty to investigate. Once there, the presence of so may pregnant underage girls (some as young as 13) is prima facie evidence of statutory rape on a broad scale and of an unsafe environment for all underage girls.

It's kind'a like a police stop for erratic driving. Once they smell the booze and mj they have the right to search for evidence of this other violation of the law they now perceive.

That makes me think the caller knew that once police were in the door they'd see enough to investigate further. Good for her in getting them in the door.

***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, April 19, 2008 2:33 PM

Sure, but what if there WAS no erratic driving and the officer LIED about it ?

And then LIED some more ?
(See Also: Brent Darrow, turn signal)

And then busted you for resisting arrest when you made an issue of it ?

Should the resisting arrest bust hold, given that it was obtained via criminal conduct in the first place ?

I mean, tell me, who are the good guys here, cause I ain't seein it...

-F
(You'll note I do not deny FLDS guilt, simply stating that the State has conducted themselves in a fashion every bit as criminal.)

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, April 19, 2008 2:35 PM

Quote:
Good for her in getting them in the door.

What the fuck ?

HOW DARE YOU.

Fine, then good on those folks waterboarding those perps down at Gitmo, cause they'll find something.

Maybe you should re-think what the hell you just said, given how often you have argued against it, little miss hypocrite.

-F

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, April 19, 2008 2:38 PM

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

"Sure, but what if there WAS no erratic driving and the officer LIED about it ?" So are you now saying there was NO call ? Or is what happened simply that some concerned (and well informed) citizen made a phony claim (for which she will legally be held liable, if they can prove it) and the rest, as they say, is history.

And, what do you think the police should do when they get these types of phone calls ? If your neighbor calls 911 to say your house is on fire, do you want the FD to sit on it a bit to be on the safe side ? If you wife calls 911 to report someone in the house do you want the police to wait for a second caller, just to confirm ?

***************************************************************
"then good on those folks waterboarding those perps down at Gitmo, cause they'll find something."
Are you saying the police are manufacturing underage pregnant girls ? Now you're just being ridiculous.

And BTW I'm not seeing the hypocrisy. I don't see any torture going on, do you ? Is this happening in secret ? Are there not lawyers in involved ? Are there not open hearings ?

You know, your position seems to be a lot like CTS, SergeantX and some others. If we close our eyes really tightly and plug our ears and hum, and tell families and groups that they can do whatever they want with children as long as it doesn't come to our attention then we can say isn't going on. Child abuse problem solved. Right ?

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, April 19, 2008 4:35 PM

I am sayin they very likely knew that call was fake when they entered into evidence in the first place.

Take that strawman out back and burn it, and for once, just for fucking ONCE - instead of cooking up some bullshit position and duct taping over me listen to what the hell I am saying here.

The State *had* the ability to do this by the book, I am keenly aware of this fact, as much as I am keenly aware they did not do so.
(See Also: Two pre-existing cases)

Although only conjecture, had they done it by the book, there would have been no excuse to simply strip every parent on site of their kids, which I also do very much suspect was the intent of the State to begin with.

The State's authority, that which we give it, rests entirely on their ability to obey a set of rules, laws and regulations in place specifically to prevent it from becoming just "rule of the gun".

To allow them to disregard those rules removes that authority and reduces it to exactly that.

I've never once disputed FLDS guilt in the matter, but the guilt of any particular parent should be the deciding factor in whether to process a case or not, rather than their belief.

Go back and read the bold, highlighted, underlined bits again, and again, and again, till you maybe get it - would you have them simply remove the children of every Catholic simply because some of them were abusers ?

Without a trial, or even an accusation ?

Cause that is what is happening here.

And now you outright advocate using phony evidence to secure illegal warrants on the assumption of guilt ?

And then when I call you on it, have the GALL to disregard my position as expressed, repeatedly, undeniably, indisputably all over the course of this thread and try to tell me I condone the fucking abuse when my primary concern is that these poor closeted souls are about to be shovelled into a system far more hostile than anything they might have been removed from ?

Not ONCE has anyone truly addressed the issues I have raised - one of which is whether this is truly an improvement on the childrens lot given that they are statistically MORE likely to be abused in the system they are being dumped into, than the one they were taken from.

Frankly, I detect a great deal of bias here, in that you really don't give a shit what happens to them kids, long as they were removed from people who you did not agree with - the very same way pro-lifers don't seem to give a rats ass about a kid the moment it pops out, well, you may not, but I do.

So you're telling me it's not ok to break the rules, spit on the law and use the rule of the gun to go after "terrorists" but it's all ok to do so going after "predators" ?

You cannot have it both ways - either you throw the law in the shitcan and admit this is rule of the gun, or you hold the authorities to the law regardless of the crime in question.

I know damn well where the grey area is, given that it's MY area of operations, and the State does not belong there - by condoning this, you are opening the door to have these very tactics someday used against YOU.

Maybe you're ok with that, but what about all the other folk who you have just hung out to dry ?

Do you not also realize that by advocating warrants based on phony claims, and militaristic tactics in serving them - that you have just in effect declared support of everything that happened at Waco, up to and including the deaths ?

I had thought people had learned a lesson from that, but I guess I was wrong.

This is why I hold the political stance I do, because Right, Left or Center, you're all so very quick to advocate violating the rights of anyone who disagrees with you that in my eyes, you're all the same.

Guilty or not, the folks at FLDS deserve a fair trial, and a fair hearing, and many of those parents are never going to recieve either one at all, much less a fair one.

And to be ok with that is as revolting a thing as I have ever seen on this board ever, which is saying quite a lot.

-Frem

It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, April 19, 2008 4:40 PM

I see some quick edit work.

I SAID that I am taking the underage pregnancy thing, from the same source that fed us the bullshit about the phone call, with the same grain of salt till I have a more accurate source of evidence.

You know, that skepticism that I held from the start while all you people were knee-jerking and screaming for heads....

Only to find out the phone call was almost certainly bullshit.

Until I have a better source than the same folk who lied about that call, damned right imma be skeptical, and I have every right to be given the apparent veracity of the source.

Never said it wasn't so - sayin that I am rightfully skeptical of an account given by the folks who just lied to me.

-F

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, April 19, 2008 4:48 PM

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

So, Frem, since you seem to duck out of the picture whenever real child abuse comes up, I'm going to continue my train of thought by myself.

First of all, if half the girls under 17 are currently pregnant I'd say there was a lot of underage sex and statutory rape going on. I don't know how anyone can draw any other conclusions.

Second, the girls have minimal education especially compared to the boys. Now if these people were meeting the legal requirements of educating their children it would look a little bit better. As it is it looks like they have pretty much slotted their females have only one choice in life.

Third, these underage girls speak of being married to much older men. And I don't hear anything about them having a choice - can those girls say no ? Do they ever say no ?

So all in all, it looks to me like females are treated as inferiors: subject to the whims of males, denied education, forbidden choice, and groomed to accept sex and brood-mare status from an early age.

I suspect this plays very nicely into male fantasies and so there is just not the outrage as when it happens to boys. Meh. I really don't expect better of most males, to tell the truth. I just find it interesting. In the inkblot of life Frem and 6-ix see - not abused little girls - but big brother stomping on them.

How stupid. And self-centered.

***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, April 19, 2008 5:06 PM

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

Well, we seem to have cross-posted.

You can't phony a pregnancy, at least not for long.

"would you have them simply remove the children of every Catholic simply because some of them were abusers ?"
IF CATHOLICS HAD THE POLICY OF SEXUALLY ABUSING YOUNG CHILDREN I WOULD REMOVE ALL CHILDREN. Not b/c some were abused, but because IT WAS A POLICY to abuse them. So maybe YOU don't get it - eh ? These girls were subject to a community policy of underage marriage and sex. As well as being denied an education or choice in their marriages. But perhaps these are small matters to you ?

And no, I don't see what the legal issue is. The police have the duty to respond to emergency calls - even if they are cranks calls, even if they are untrue. They can't pick and choose which they will and won't address.

Oh yeah, AND TO BE ON BOARD WITH A COMMUNITY POLICY OF ABUSING YOUNG GIRLS IS AS REVOLTING AS ANYTHING I'VE SEEN ON THIS BOARD.

***************************************************************
Got it ?

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, April 19, 2008 5:15 PM

Let me explain again, since you are ignoring willfully, maliciously, nastily, every single explaination I present to you in favor of a whole cloth manufactured strawman.

http://dictionary.law.com/definition2.asp?selected=795
fruit of the poisonous tree
n. in criminal law, the doctrine that evidence discovered due to information found through illegal search or other unconstitutional means (such as a forced confession) may not be introduced by a prosecutor. The theory is that the tree (original illegal evidence) is poisoned and thus taints what grows from it. For example, as part of a coerced admission made without giving a prime suspect the so-called "Miranda warnings" (statement of rights, including the right to remain silent and what he/she says will be used against them), the suspect tells the police the location of stolen property. Since the admission cannot be introduced as evidence in trial, neither can the stolen property.

By their own actions, they have fucked up any chance of successfully prosecuting those responsible for the abuse in anything remotely resembling a fair trial.

And a fair trial is their right, regardless of what they have done - I have not, at any point whatsoever held any position but that FLDS is guilty to some degree of the crimes in question.

But you cannot simply punish an ENTIRE religion without a trial.

And consider that very lack of education and self-realization among the girls in particular as they get fed into the shredding machine that is the Texas Foster Care System ?

What does it take to make you realize this is potentially dangerous for them ?

That *IF* the State can LEGALLY prove individual justification to seperate the children from parental custody (unlikely now, thanks to the poison tree) that these girls are going to need something MORE than just being dumped into the nearest handy foster home ?

Of course, since everyone is willing to accept rule of the gun and damn the law, it's probably going to slide, setting a very dangerous precedent, but still, that leaves the question of
what the hell to DO with these girls once the media frenzy subsides and the State simply disposes of them into the trashheap of the Foster Care System without a backwards glance, doesn't it ?

But no, that never did enter your mind now did it ?

They're gonna need a better solution than that, Doc Perry put that one up front and center, only to be dismissed and ignored in much the same fashion as folks have done me.

Those kids, as you say especially the girls - they ain't rescued at all, not even close, and everybody is so damn busy sticking knives into FLDS (without regard to the influence of THAT, on these kids) that no one has paid a mind to the more important thing of how exactly to handle the situation as it seems to be unfolding.

How bout putting down the knife yourself and getting on the damn phone (where I've been all day) and getting some folk who have the resources to offer assistance to do so ?

And then breaking the red tape blockade so that they have the ability ?

Had they any sense, they would go straight to Doc Perry and his people and issue emergency funding for care and treatment of these kids.
http://www.childtrauma.org/default.asp
(EDIT, oops, that is the old link)
http://childtraumaacademy.org/default.aspx

You wanna help matters, help put the arm on the Governor of TX and make that happen - we're workin on scaring up resources independantly, but that's not really gonna be at full steam till monday, cause we need a solid financial institution to hold it and a lawyer to write the boilerplate, yadda yadda...

Your own bias has completely blinded you to any damn thing I have said here, and I highly reccommend you go back and re-read the thread from the beginning.

-F

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, April 19, 2008 5:23 PM

Look, I am sick of your outright lies, Rue.

And you could damn well make a case for the Catholic Church having such abuse as an institutional policy at one time or another.

I stated my piece, often enough, and you have repeatedly and in sequence lied about my position on this matter, lied about how I feel about it, as if you had any way of knowing, and flat lied about where I stand in spite of really overt and obvious statements to clarify it.

I am sick of your hypocritical bullshit, and when it comes right down to it, you ain't not a whit different from any of the right-leaning jackboot snugglers, it's just all about WHO the jackboot lands on, between you, and there's really not a damn dimes worth of difference in my opinion of it.

And to be blunt, I don't think not one of you gives a shit about any of these kids whatsoever, you're all too busy celebrating the destruction of a group you did not agree with to even bother thinking about it, and when all is said and done and it blows over you'll just forget about them as they drop beneath your notice or caring, if they were ever there as anything more than a damned excuse to begin with.

Leaving folks like me in the darkness cussing you and trying to pick up the fucking pieces.

Go to hell.

-Frem

It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, April 19, 2008 5:24 PM

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

You simply haven't shown it's the fruit of a poisonous tree. They get a call - and they are required to respond. Having responded and having uncovered other facts in the course of their response is a legitimate process.

And children are typically removed from dangerous situations until such time as an final evaluation can be made. No decision has been reached as to the ultimate future of the children in question, just that they will be in protective custody until the process is completed.

I work with and know a few people who were fostered to other families as children. So I don't see it as a one-way trip to hell.

***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, April 19, 2008 5:26 PM

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

Yeah, well, that was certainly a rational post there, Frem.

***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, April 19, 2008 6:21 PM

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

By SCOTT MICHELS
SAN ANGELO, Texas April 18, 2008

Bruce Perry, a child psychologist, testified that the traditional foster care system could be destructive to children taken from the sect's ranch. But he also testified that the children could be at risk if they are returned to the ranch.

The representatives for the sect's girls ages 5 to 11 requested the children be returned to their parents, while state Children's Protective Services comes up with a long-term plan.

But Perry warned that the possible problem with that kind of arrangement is the children's continued exposure to the destructive belief system that promotes sex could be harmful. When asked, Perry said that the youngest children are probably least at risk if returned to parents in the short term because they are least influenced by unhealthy beliefs. He also said that he thought it would be OK for young mothers to continue to stay with their babies until a more long-term decision is made.

By LISA SANDBERG and TERRI LANGFORD
Copyright 2008 Houston Chronicle and San Antonio Express-News

Dr. Bruce Perry said the adherence by the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints to underage marriage and underage sex puts all children at risk.

"I think that young girls — 14, 15, 16 (years) — are not mature enough to consent to a marriage," Perry said, testifying for the state of Texas.

By MICHELLE ROBERTS – 1 day ago

SAN ANGELO, Texas (AP) — The belief system at a polygamous sect is abusive and teen girls do not resist early marriages because they are trained to be obedient and compliant, an expert testified Friday in a custody hearing for 416 children seized from a secluded ranch.

Many of the women had children when they were minors, some as young as 13, a child welfare worker said earlier in the child custody hearing, one of the largest and most convoluted in U.S. history.

(Bruce Perry) An expert in children in cults testified Friday that while the teen girls believed they were marrying out of free choice, it's a choice based on lessons they've had from birth.

"Obedience is a very important element of their belief system," said psychiatrist Bruce Perry, who interviewed three girls seized in the April 3 raid. "Compliance is being godly, it's part of their honoring God."

He also said that many of the adults at the Yearning For Zion Ranch owned by the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints are loving parents and that the boys seemed emotionally healthy when he played with them.

But, he noted, the sect's belief system "is abusive. The culture is very authoritarian."

Tuesday, Apr. 15, 2008 By HILARY HYLTON/AUSTIN

In some ways, Perry said, this situation highlights "fracture lines in our culture" about lifestyles and parental control. "But the state is not saying 'Don't wear those dresses," Perry says, referring to the legal basis of the Eldorado raid. "It's saying you cannot have sex with 12-year-olds."

For other experts, however, the concern is not the separation of church and state but deprogramming. The bottom line, according to Utah psychologist Dr. Larry Beall, who has worked work with women and children who have fled polygamists sects, is the FLDS is a "cult" involved in "plain ole brainwashing since birth." Says Beale, "They have been taught that anyone on the outside is untrustworthy. They are the enemy and they are going to hurt you." He adds, "My experiences with these kids is once they are out of the controlled environment they come to enjoy their freedom." (Upon reaching puberty, FLDS girls are required to marry, usually into the existing families of older men.)

By TERRI LANGFORD
Copyright 2008 Houston Chronicle

"This is one of the most challenging situations you face in a child protective situation where you have children who are socialized into an abusive lifestyle, yet they feel it is normative," said Perry, a senior fellow of ChildTrauma Academy in Houston, a nonprofit that conducts research and provides services for mistreated children.

A child who has lived in a restrictive community such as FLDS, where children are told they will risk their souls or be tortured by the mainstream world, can't help but develop a fear of outsiders, Perry and others say.

"Their behavior is what some might call passive-aggressive," Perry said. Sect children act cooperative but know how to dodge questions.

And that's something CPS already is finding out.

By Julia Lyon
The Salt Lake Tribune
Article Last Updated: 04/10/2008 12:22:29 AM MDT

Children taken from a Texas polygamous community "in some ways . . . still are pretty healthy" despite their removal, said a child psychiatrist advising Texas officials.
"There was an initial desire to have this mental health SWAT team, but the truth is because of the circumstances around the way removal took place it was actually not that traumatic - it wasn't that hostile," said Bruce Perry, a senior fellow at the Child Trauma Academy in Houston.
Child welfare officials "allowed adult members to come with [children]," Perry said. "I think they did a lot of things right."
The children's justice center has also learned in its own work that FLDS children generally are not taught about abuse in the terms public schools commonly use to educate students.
"These kids aren't taught the same way as children in elementary and junior high school are taught about good touch-bad touch," she said.
Perry has a similar perspective.
"Part of the problem is the children have been socialized to a way of thinking," he said. "They don't understand the degree, I don't think, the degree they're being exploited or harmed when they're given off to a marriage at age 12."

***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, April 19, 2008 8:21 PM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Seems as if Dr Perry isn't on your side in this Frem.

---------------------------------
Let's party like it's 1929.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, April 20, 2008 12:23 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
I have no problem suing church leaders for covering up criminal actions or even charging them with a crime. But we don’t sue the entire medical field or the entire legal field for the malpractice of a single doctor or lawyer or even a handful of doctors and lawyers. So why is it that you want to talk in terms of the “Catholic Church” or the “Church.” Isn’t it possible that you’re painting with too broad of a brush. Do you really think every Catholic or even every Catholic minister covered it up?

If the medical field helps cover things up we go after those in the medical field that do so. If a pedophile is found working in a school we go after those that hired and failed to monitor them as well. I wonder why you hold the catholic church to different standards?

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, April 20, 2008 9:30 AM

ANTIMASON

i dont know mormon theology too well, but in the bible, in correct protestant tradition, one cannot be a priest if he has more then one 'wife'. throughout the bible, the reason adultery is condemned is because God created woman to complete man, so that they may become "one in the flesh". this was in Genesis, there is no other version of this outside of judiac history. thats kind of relevant. i am not a mormon(or muslim), but the doctrines concerning multiple wives, and endless celestial sexual partners is not consistent what-so-ever with the bible. those are different belief systems altogether

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, April 20, 2008 11:05 AM

FLETCH2

Moses was loved by God and had two wives, Zipporah and an ethiopian woman. David I believe had even more and that's before we start talking concubines.

http://www.biblicalpolygamy.com/polygamists

There are biblical references here if you like.

I don't think it fair to have more than one wife because it means there is some part of you that you hold back from each.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, April 20, 2008 11:49 AM

ANTIMASON

thats true, but Moses wasnt sinless, and he eventually was told by God that he wouldnt enter 'the promised land'(Canaan). its been awhile, but i believe God dealt with David as well over this. notably, even the prophets were imperfect

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, April 20, 2008 5:34 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by citizen:
Quote:
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
I have no problem suing church leaders for covering up criminal actions or even charging them with a crime. But we don’t sue the entire medical field or the entire legal field for the malpractice of a single doctor or lawyer or even a handful of doctors and lawyers. So why is it that you want to talk in terms of the “Catholic Church” or the “Church.” Isn’t it possible that you’re painting with too broad of a brush. Do you really think every Catholic or even every Catholic minister covered it up?
If the medical field helps cover things up we go after those in the medical field that do so. If a pedophile is found working in a school we go after those that hired and failed to monitor them as well. I wonder why you hold the catholic church to different standards?

Actually the more interesting question is whose post are you responding to? Because it’s not mine - unless you just don’t know what you’re talking about.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, April 20, 2008 9:02 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
Actually the more interesting question is whose post are you responding to? Because it’s not mine - unless you just don’t know what you’re talking about.

Actually the more interesting question is why you're lying about what you said and trying to pass that off on me.

Everything you've tried to slur Frem with so far, whether he does it or not, it's certainly stuff you do.

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, April 21, 2008 1:46 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by citizen:
Quote:
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
Actually the more interesting question is whose post are you responding to? Because it’s not mine - unless you just don’t know what you’re talking about.
Actually the more interesting question is why you're lying about what you said and trying to pass that off on me.

Everything you've tried to slur Frem with so far, whether he does it or not, it's certainly stuff you do.

You accuse of me of lying about what I said, but the very first line of MY post, as quoted from YOUR post is:

“I have no problem suing church leaders for covering up criminal actions or even charging them with a crime.”

You just accused me of saying the opposite of what I actually said from the post YOU quoted? Is English your first language?

So it turns out that I’m not lying at all. You either can’t read, didn’t read or you’re lying. I’ll let you decide which it is, I don’t really care.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, April 21, 2008 2:59 AM

Solomon had 700 wives, supposedly. The Old Testament has many laws dealing with the management of multiple wives. In a time when justice tended to be swift and brutal and women were second class citizens, this should attest to the complexity of polygamy as a legal issue. As far as religion/society goes, it was acceptable in Judaism for a long time, largely because it had been practiced as a tradition for centuries before Israel was even a nation. And this was the case in many older cultures, but eventually it fell out of favor with societies, when states tried to manage it on a legal level, and I think it just became too complicated. Today, where divorces can cause enormous legal problems and financial hardships, polygamy practiced as a mainstream institute would grind this nation to a halt.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, April 21, 2008 4:23 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
You accuse of me of lying about what I said, but the very first line of MY post, as quoted from YOUR post is:

Sure, you throw a bone when caught out to try and gain some of your lost credibility, but you've basically been saying throughout the thread that the only people who can be held responsible for anything is the immediate culprit. When other people have suggested that those that enabled and covered up their actions should be held accountable you've attempted to shout them down, usually pretty childishly. Your maturity shows in your first reply to me, for someone who bases nearly everyone of his replies to other people on strawmen and lies about their position, you sure can't take it if you see it coming back.

But why I'd be surprised that you'd act like a hypocritical authoritarian prick I don't know. I mean, that's how you always act

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, April 21, 2008 4:31 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by citizen:
Quote:
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
You accuse of me of lying about what I said, but the very first line of MY post, as quoted from YOUR post is:
Sure, you throw a bone when caught out to try and gain some of your lost credibility, but you've basically been saying throughout the thread that the only people can be held responsible for anything is the priest that did it. I don't hold myself responsible for your tactics and anti-non-catholic agenda.

This so-called “bone” is the very post you responded. So like I said, whatever post you think you were responding to, it wasn’t mine - it was something in you dreamed up. A lie, if you will.

“anti-non-catholic agenda” ??????

Bwahahahahaha

Oh, wait.

Bwahahahahahahahahahah

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, April 21, 2008 4:53 AM

You're still a liar and an authoritarian prick who hates non-catholics

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, April 22, 2008 6:30 AM

CANTTAKESKY

Quote:
And to be blunt, I don't think not one of you gives a shit about any of these kids whatsoever,

As you say Frem, it is exactly like the pro-lifers who don't give a shit once the baby is out.

Kids are just a easily exploitable excuse to justify their political agendas of control.

If they truly cared about any of these kids, they wouldn't think state custody was that much more of an improvement in the kids' welfare and lives.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, April 22, 2008 6:32 AM

Not that anyone really cares, but for what it's worth, an update.

Attorney Tip Hargrove, who represents two FLDS women, elicited Perry's admission that he has never spoken with a leader of the FLDS nor read the church's doctrine. The courtroom broke into laughter when he said he has gained his knowledge through press accounts, though he takes them "with a grain of salt."

Perry said he has found much to be admired about the FLDS. The mothers are loving and respectful of their children, he said. But, he said, the culture is abusive. "The environment is authoritarian."

The few choices that church members have are often false choices, he said.

Yes, Perry believes the culture to be abusive.

Hell, so do I - but we need to do more than just shuffle them from one abusive culture into another.

Of course, had you asked me the same question about most faiths, I would also state that they are authoritarian and abusive.

And of COURSE these folk are insular, suspicious of the state and hostile to it's agents, given incidents like this they got reason to be, and that goes for many religious communities, not just FLDS - all of whom are shitting bricks and thinking some really scary, not to mention stupid, things right now.

Perry is dead on that they should have had an intervention team on standby if they were gonna do this, and while he and his folk are doing what little is possible given the situation, there's also the matter of simply not knowing enough ABOUT it to be fully effective since his only information source up to that point was from media sources that have already been proven guilty of shading the truth - from our accounts, several FLDS members have come forward to offer detailed information, both folks hostile and friendly to FLDS, and I hope that knowledge is put to good use, as I can think of no one better qualified to use it than Perry and his team.

If they're gonna pull em out of there, then these kids deserve something better than the hellhole of the Texas Foster Care System in response, otherwise it's just out of the frying pan and into the fire.

Now...

Fact, of all the girls, only twenty pregnancies, and only five underage - I remark that this is better than the national average for that region of Texas, and note that those five cases should be prosecuted, with the caveat that they'd damn sure better sort out whether the search as a whole gets tossed before they try.

I will also note that if you examine the Texas Foster Care System closely, they have this exact SAME problem on a far worse scale - so, umm, how is this going to improve their situation any ?

Fact, "Voss acknowledged that DNA samples have already been taken from children, without approval of their court-appointed attorneys."

"Earlier today, Voss testified that on the first night of what would become a days-long raid, her team of child protection investigators interviewed several girls under the age of 17 at the FLDS ranch under "intimidating" circumstances."

Fact, NO CRIMINAL CHARGES HAVE BEEN FILED.

Fact, Parental rights have been terminated in spite of this.

And THAT, is where we drew the line.

Now, we got a set of hearings between now and June 5th, which is the deadline for the state to make it's case - something they had NO intention of actually obeying till some folk applied the hammer.

And yes, the hammer got applied, and it's GONNA be applied.

We're a nation of laws, not a fucking lynch mob you bunch of berks, and we can at least TRY to PRETEND it once in a while.

Since they've already went and done DNA sampling without a warrant, a further violation of law and procedure, we're just gonna press em to the wall - if with stolen DNA in hand, they STILL cannot prove abuse, they WILL be handing the kid back, if they wanna monitor things afterwords that's up to them and they can work that out with the ACLU and FLDS leadership in such a way as they can all tolerate.

And if they wanna bitch about education, that's a secondary issue and it sure doesn't help when you have several outright admissions by ranking policefolk that they planned to use such inspections to "get at" FLDS and snoop around.
(So much for that fourth amendment, eh ?)

That REALLY didn't help matters on the State's behalf at all when they unrepentingly admitted such intent to misuse the law.

It also doesn't help the State's case any that Voss has a really blatant axe to grind, and while she may have cause and reason to grind it, this does not help her credibility on the stand at all given that she went over a couple procedural lines in processing the case.

While y'all were all busy calling for torches and pitchforks, SOME of us were actually trying to get the State to comply with it's own damn laws and procedures and do this in the manner it SHOULD have been done to begin with.

And we're gonna be riding their ass to make sure it happens.

And yes, I know some of em are guilty, never said otherwise.

Regardless of the bullshit, lies and intentional, malicious distortions, I want justice done too, but by the book, dammit, anything less reduces it to naught more than rule of the gun - and if you don't find that scary, you MIGHT do a little research into recent arms purchases and some discreet inquiries on where and how to legally obtain Class-III weaponry that have been bouncing around the gun collector world, cause the idea of another Waco type incident with more firepower involved is a bloodbath I never, ever wanna see in this country, and scared people do some really stupid things, folk, never you doubt it.

So we're gonna ride the State's ass and make their wanna-be lynch mob obey their own damn rules and laws in every way we can manage it, both to avoid both setting some really dangerous precedents, and show enough spine to discourage further abuses against other religious communities.

They can prosecute them for crimes, but this has come damn close to prosecuting them for their beliefs, too damn close, and anyone who says otherwise is willfully blinding themselves.

Unlike some, I give a shit about the rights even of people I hate, cause if you thought about it for a few minutes, you might ponder that I am extremely, violently antagonistic versus the whole judeo-christian concept religion as a whole, and not a whit fond of those who practice it in any fashion whatsoever, something I have never denied or even hidden.

But they got a right to believe what they wanna believe, no matter how revolting I or anyone else finds it, so long as they obey the law.

Every time you oh-so-blithely hand over the Constitutional Rights of someone because you dislike how they use them, you hand over your own, and mine as well, and I find that despicable.

The State wants to charge and try these folks for crimes, that's one thing, and they can damn well do it BY THE BOOK, cause we'll be there, as long as enough of us are still standing to make it happen.

And add in the wonderful fucking headache of trying to discourage insular, suspicious, frightened religious communities* from "arming up" against a possible repeat of this kind of occurance against THEM - pointing out that the very fact of doing so is a provocation to the State which could cause the very event they wish to prevent by it....

And being stymied on that by a lynch-mob atmosphere and partial hysteria among their own due to it.

Is that where we want this to go ?
Cause it damn sure ain't where I wanna see it go, folks.

-Frem
*It's a damn lucky thing to have enough cred with these folk that they will at least hear me out, most of them - in spite of the fact that I don't share or am even hostile to their beliefs, at least they'll listen to me, but that has to be done personally and thus I don't have a lotta time at the moment to argue with folks who are gonna ignore everything I say and make up shit besides.

You wanna help matters any, get on the horn and push for a solution other than the TX Foster Care Sytem for the kids who DO have to be removed, cause we just ain't got enough people to handle every end of this, and that's a fact.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, April 22, 2008 9:19 AM

THATWEIRDGIRL

Finn, maybe Citizen is thinking you're me? I don't think the entire Church should be responsible, legality-wise, for pedophilia. I do think the immediate supervisor who knew about said acts and hid them should be held responsible. It wouldn't hurt to have all priests undergo some sort of psych rundown before ordaining them (maybe they do this now, I don't know). I think the home diocese should furnish counseling for the victim.

As for the kids and moms at the ranch. I feel for them, I do. I remember when I 'became a woman', my father joked that in some cultures and older traditions he would now select the best warrior or richest man in the clan and I would be forced to become a wife and mother. I was horrified. He smiled and asked me if I was glad we lived in a modern society. I was glad, very glad. I was in 4th grade.

I don't want the kids taken out of loving situations. This process worries me greatly. I'm familiar with foster systems and they're not that great. Let's hope the kids that need removed and the adults that need a boot to the head get what they need.

---
Sometimes I lie awake at night, and I ask, "Where have I gone wrong?" Then a voice says to me, "This is going to take more than one night."
-- Charlie Brown

www.thatcostumegirl.com
www.thatweirdgirl.com

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, April 22, 2008 9:57 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by thatweirdgirl:
Finn, maybe Citizen is thinking you're me?

No I was thinking of Finn. He can rarely admit he's a said something, even when you quote him.

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, April 22, 2008 10:29 AM

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

I have to say Frem, I was wondering if you'd turn against your hero Perry once you found out his views were different from yours. And I have my answer.

***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, April 22, 2008 10:59 AM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Frem, un-bunch your undies, okay? I know your love of children colliding with your hate of government is causing all sorts of mental static, but you're getting downright hysterical.

I think I understand what you're saying, but unfortunately events have overtaken process. I don't know as I care at this point whether what was done was "by the book". If the testimony is such that a large number of young girls are pregnant, were pregnant, or have had sex, the FIRST priority is- or should be- to get those kids someplace safe. Now, I have no idea about the Texas foster care system. If that's not a safe place, what are the alternatives?

I do remember reading about this group in the LA Times more than a year ago, and I wondered mightily why something was done then.

---------------------------------
Let's party like it's 1929.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, April 22, 2008 12:24 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by thatweirdgirl:
Finn, maybe Citizen is thinking you're me? I don't think the entire Church should be responsible, legality-wise, for pedophilia. I do think the immediate supervisor who knew about said acts and hid them should be held responsible. It wouldn't hurt to have all priests undergo some sort of psych rundown before ordaining them (maybe they do this now, I don't know). I think the home diocese should furnish counseling for the victim.

Citizen is just doing what Citizen does - looking for an excuse to through a fit.

As for your opinion, I agree - take down the bad guys, but don’t blame everyone for the actions of a few simply because they share the same church.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, April 22, 2008 12:56 PM

How does one 'through' a fit?

.

And you, Finn, are the only person to throw a fit so far.

Finn is just doing what he always does, lying. He's a compulsive liar though, so whatever.

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, April 22, 2008 1:17 PM

Rue - my work is based on his, and to be bluntly honest he's probably forgotten more about this specific issue than I am ever likely to know, and basing it off a *much* better education to begin with.

They sure hell didn't give him much to work with, which was quite negligent of them given that they wanted him to testify as an expert witness without proper background material - far as I am aware of that issue has since been rectified.

Besides which, like I hinted at before - my bias against these religions doesn't exactly qualify me to give a neutral opinion, as I think they are all abusive, just in different manner and degree.

People are human, and everyone makes mistakes, but Perry is a person of strong conviction and he will give the best he's got on it - and even HE says the question of where they are better off is keepin HIM up nights, cause it's a damn difficult one full of moral, legal, and psychological implications with pretty high stakes and no room for screwups given the potential lifelong impacts here.

Siggy - The hysterical tone comes from saying something in underlined bold italic over and over emphasised only to be told I didn't say it, or meant something else, and I am right pissed about it when backed into a really hard corner with a lot of work to do, not half enough people or resources to do it on, and trying to put a chill pill to folks who are gettin some damn crazy ideas and might act on them if it becomes apparent that the State no longer has to play by the rules.

So it's VERY important that the State comply with it's own laws, at least in helping put a brake on that kind of stupidity... and if I sound frustrated to the point of pyschotic, that'd be about par for the course.

Quote:
Now, I have no idea about the Texas foster care system.

It's horrific, truly horrific - see the research links included above, or go do some digging, this is between the devil and the deep blue sea here.

Quote:
If that's not a safe place, what are the alternatives?

Ain't many, we're workin on that as hard as possible cause THAT needs an answer and doubledamnquick, especially if it's gonna require private funding, which is maybe doable - but a lot depends on those hearings, and we need to know at least a rough estimate of how many cases we gotta deal with, and whether the Mormons will assist us in this - I know they are not connected with FLDS, and that they don't wanna foster that perception cause they're scared of staring down the same State owned gunbarrels, but they COULD be a lot of help in this, and getting the State to act within the bounds of it's own laws would go pretty far in setting those fears at ease.

As for hearing of them before, believe me, I got my own axes to grind with FLDS and others, but those are my axes and I'll grind them when it's not likely to hang innocents out to dry - once we got the custody and safety of the innocents resolved, then we'll see about grinding them...

But first things first - get the innocent out of the crossfire.

-Frem
It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, April 22, 2008 2:52 PM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

I now see what you mean by the State playing fast and loose cutting off ties/ options of groups that might help, like the Mormons. I hope to god- or whatever- that they haven't been scared off.

Unfortuantley with a disabled hubby and child, I wouldn't be much of a helping hand foster-wise. But if it comes to $$$.... THAT I can help with. Let me know.

As an FYI, I thought the whole Waco incident was grossly, grossly mishandled. As I see it there were two choices: leave, or bust down the door. The long standoff was just... stupid. If I'd been in charge I would simply have faded from the scene. Left a couple of guys in the background just to keep tabs on who's going in and out, making sure that food is still being delivered, that children are not being harmed a la Jim Jones. Let Koresh go on and on about his enemies "out there" but after a few months of nothing in view, eventually it wears thin. But keeping a big, intimidating military-style presence just played into Koresh's paranoid teachings... which at that point wasn't paranoia anymore it was fact.

---------------------------------
Let's party like it's 1929.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, April 22, 2008 6:57 PM

Quote:
If I'd been in charge I would simply have faded from the scene. Left a couple of guys in the background just to keep tabs on who's going in and out, making sure that food is still being delivered, that children are not being harmed a la Jim Jones. Let Koresh go on and on about his enemies "out there" but after a few months of nothing in view, eventually it wears thin. But keeping a big, intimidating military-style presence just played into Koresh's paranoid teachings... which at that point wasn't paranoia anymore it was fact.

Bingo.

Just keep a tight perimeter and wait for em to throw in the towel - done right, it's not really significantly more expensive than keeping them in prison, ain't like they're going anywhere and like I said, you can ALWAYS resort to force, if you got it handy, but it should not be the first tool you reach for.

And it's worked quite fine when that has been done, as in Montana with the whole Freemen standoff - it was the constant provocations that needlessly escalated matters at Waco.

All I can publicly say right now - we have significant reinforcements, don't worry about $$$, it's there, just a matter where and how to use it most effectively.

Mind, The legal fund and trio of lawsuits is handled by others, not us, but since the propaganda game is gonna get played whether or not it should be, some internet specialists are working rather feverishly on sitework through a Canadian host who's unlikely to bow to extra-legal pressure.
(For the record, I disagree but was outvoted there.)

As for care and custody - this is where some help from the Mormons would come in handy, especially as even in spite of theological differences they share enough tenets to be less traumatic or even sympathetic as potential foster parents if it should come to that, but they're scared shitless of guilt-by-association right now.

Some of the kids have been moved to foster care without a proper hearing, and Habeus Corpus has been filed in attempts to get those hearings first, and there's some further potential legal flak given the case histories of some of the fosters, but I cannot hand over details there at this time.

The current projected plan is to have Perry's folk down at the childtrauma academy do an evaluation and treatment plan for those who are proven victims of abuse, and try to place them with Mormon fosters willing to accept the extra effort of said treatment plan and get them up to speed if they are educationally behind, with a minimum of psychological harm.

But without anything to work with, and the State constantly trying to duck out of playing by the rules, and ever increasing antagonism from very pissed off, upset members of FLDS, it becomes paramount that the State be visibly in compliance with it's own regs, procedures and laws - because this is utterly critical in securing the needed cooperation that without which, things could go very badly wrong.

Just *imagine* how the spark of even just one of those removed kids being then abused in a Foster Home would add to this kindling, especially were such to happen now.

And as matters stand, that is a high statistical possibility, given the condition of the TX Foster Care System, and the amount of children involved here.

If THAT happens, there's no way in hell we can keep a lid on this mess, it'll blow sky high no matter what we do.

I'd really, really, really prefer that not to happen.

-Frem
EDIT: Here's the Strayhorn reports on the TX Foster Care System, and shamefully nothing significant has changed since these were written.
http://www.window.state.tx.us/news/60623statement.html
http://www.window.state.tx.us/forgottenchildren/
Provided we get the matter at hand resolved, this whole issue might also help spotlight and draw public ire to the TX systems problems and generate enough political pressure to get some folk off their ass about it, but first things first, here...

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, April 23, 2008 6:43 PM

Update:

It's prettymuch a confirmed event that Swinson was the caller pretending to be "Sarah" - the number links back to a pre-pay phone she had used to make other false claims.

This also lends credence to the thought that officials knew the report was fake, since that number was a dead giveaway on even the most cursory of investigation.

A tipsheet handed out to some of the social workers has set a lot of teeth on edge given inaccuracies bordering on propaganda, and some of the social workers themselves have expressed annoyance that it is not consistent with the witnessed behavior and actions of those they are working with - what's on it, I don't know, but it pissed a lot of folk off.

They apparently also handed it to the Foster parents that they shoved some of these kids on, setting up a potentially adversarial environment based on bad information, as you can imagine that ain't helpin matters any.

The LDS(Mormons) are trying like hell to distance themselves at this point, out of fear of winding up on the same short end of the stick - not only did we ask their assistance, but from what I gather so did the authorities, only to be met with a fast, flat refusal and the assertation that the LDS has nothing in common and the beliefs are in fact hostile to each other.

I don't doubt there's some antagonism, but they overstated it significantly cause like I said, they're scared shitless of guilt-by-association, and like it or not, if we have to place some of these kids in the least traumatic environment possible, we NEED their help.

And our chances of getting it get dimmer and dimmer every time the State does an end run on their own laws and rules, which is a damn nonstop thing right now, or at least their trying to.

While not directly involved, those working on the sites for them have been real Yeomen about it, supposedly the sites are up, and information is being added as fast as it can be hammered in...

But it is my opinion that such is a propaganda effort more than anything else, and I stand against shading the truth on this, so I am not whatever involved in that end of things.

All I can offer at the moment,
-F

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, April 24, 2008 7:15 AM

CANTTAKESKY

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
Unfortuantley with a disabled hubby and child, I wouldn't be much of a helping hand foster-wise. But if it comes to $$$.... THAT I can help with. Let me know.

Siggy, you have a disabled hubby? Here I thought you were a man all this time. Or do you swing that way?

I'm confused.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, April 24, 2008 9:15 AM

Update:

They unsealed the documents - Swinson was indeed the caller, and yes, the State KNEW this when they filed the warrant, this is no longer in doubt.

The appeals court sided with us this morning in that individual hearings are required, while dodging the fact that the State has already violated the law repeatedly - although they did schedule 48 hearings for 29 Apr.

The Salt Lake County Bar association has come to our aid over the fact that this event is a total violation of Constitutional and Civil Rights, and we might be picking up some additional legal personnel over that, we will see.

A relevant case has come to light in Arlington County, read it and make your own call on it.
http://www.examiner.com/a-1347693~Baby_snatching_by_Arlington_County.h
tml

Not helping matters is yesterdays Supreme Court Decision that the State no longer has to abide by the Fourth Amendment.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080423/ap_on_go_su_co/scotus_search;_ylt=
Ao3i9tdcyQSFSrgmzj9PkFGs0NUE

Although apparently not big news, that has some pretty nasty implications all by itself, and the timing of this ruling is quite suspect, if you ask me.

The State keeps moving these kids around, trying to "shake them loose" and break contact between them and their families, some of the mothers were told either go with them, or never see them again and got NO chance to contact their lawyers before that decision, unknown at this time how many got on the buses.

The cops shook our tail car by pulling it over for a "routine stop" and simply holding it under threat of force without charges or a ticket, till the caravan was out of sight, the authorities seem very keen on splitting up and moving around the children constantly - which makes it damn hard to keep track and really increases the difficulty of representing them, several Guardian Ad Litems have complained to me that they no longer have any idea where the child they are representing even IS, much less in what conditions they are staying, or with who.

Initial reports are that those buses did not all go to same destination, either, waiting for confirmation on that at this time.

As far as we can tell, surprisingly, Boy's Ranch is doing the job of caring for the boys in their care as best that can be expected under the circumstances, and apparently on a charitable emergency basis as the State has made no effort to renumerate them for expenses, they do seem to be trying to work up a plan and have not introduced them into the regular program, which is wise, one would hope they are consulting with Perry's folk, but no way to confirm that while respecting their privacy so we'll simply suggest it and hold off on that front.

They seem to be in a bit of a rock and a hard place themselves, the State has pressured them via CPS, and CFBR has evidenced a certain skepticism of the State and CPS's motives and intent, which has lead in part to that lack of renumeration, apparently they mistook CFBR's commitment to the kids under their care, and I believe I might have as well, so we'll be giving that the benefit of the doubt till we see otherwise.

The Canadians are gritting their teeth a little, cause if the State improperly seperated and severed a parent-child relationship of someone Canadian, they will have to get involved, they don't want to - but it's becoming increasingly likely they might be dragged into this, and that's kind of messy, to put it lightly.

And we can prettymuch forget about LDS(Mormons) helping, what with the States continual violation of their own rules, laws, procedures, lack of respect for due process, and in really blatant, unapologetic fashion - there's not a hope in hell at this point that they will offer so much as a single word or dime of assistance officially, and have advised us rather harshly against appealing to individuals, with vague threats.

I did advise them against "arming up" given that all FFL purchases go into the BATFE database and if they pop a warning flag it might start something, but they didn't wanna hear it and sent me packin fairly aggressively.

They seemed very nervous, if not downright frightened, overall, and that gives me the willies, for some damn obvious reasons.

It's not lookin good folks, without a hell of a lot of support, fairly quick, the boys might do ok, but it's looking more and more like the girls and younger kids might wind up a write-off, and with no one able or willing to make the State comply, they can prettymuch do whatever the hell they want and be damned to the Law and Constitution.

You got any ideas, I'd damn sure like to hear em, cause as it stands there's really not a damn thing standing in between this someday happening to anyone, and those who have kids should really feel some concern over that fact.

-Frem

It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, April 24, 2008 10:36 AM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

No, not a man. Most people assumed I was a guy altho Chris had me figured out a long time ago! I hope that doesn't change how people view me in the future.

---------------------------------
Let's party like it's 1929.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, April 24, 2008 10:45 AM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Quote:
... the authorities seem very keen on splitting up and moving around the children constantly - which makes it damn hard to keep track and really increases the difficulty of representing them, several Guardian Ad Litems have complained to me that they no longer have any idea where the child they are representing even IS, much less in what conditions they are staying, or with who.

This sounds very much like how the post-911 detainees were treated: detained w/o charges, no list provided anywhere of who was where, moved about in secret, no representation allowed by request from the detainee, family members not able to find - much less assist- their loved ones, attorneys not being able to find their own clients, etc.

---------------------------------
Let's party like it's 1929.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, April 24, 2008 11:00 AM

CANTTAKESKY

Good for Chris! Gawd, I can't believe I missed that.

Well, it is good to know there's another woman regular on this board.

And no, it doesn't change my view of you.

(Just kidding. On the bashing, not the fact that my view won't change.)

--------------------------
I'm not confused...I'm clueless!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, April 24, 2008 11:07 AM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

HAHAHAHAHA!!!

There are more of "us" here than you think....

---------------------------------
Let's party like it's 1929.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, April 24, 2008 11:08 AM

LIGHTBRINGER

I feel like a woman... that is, exploited, dismissed, and I might go home with you if you buy me a lot of drinks.
Frankly, I wish you were all girls, and then I would have a de facto harem; the de jure ones are so difficult to find these days.

A casual stroll through the lunatic asylum shows that faith does not prove anything.
-Friedrich Nietzsche

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, April 24, 2008 11:51 AM