FLDS Largest Child Abuse Case in U.S. History
Angelocracy.com
http://angelocracy.blogspot.com
this case is not about polygamy,I don't care how adult men and women
chose to live. This case is about child abuse. This is about girls
13,14, and 16 years old marrying men in their 30's and 40's. This is
about 16 year old girls who have had 3 babies. This girls never go to
public school. Never have much contact with the outside world.,
We say how great it is how we might have a women as President. We talk
about the freedom that the young girls of Iraq and Afghanistan now
have. We talk about the women not having to ware Burqa anymore.
But what about the young women and girls in this nation? Who looks
after there safety?
We should all be ashamed.
http://angelocracy.blogspot.com/2008/04/flds-largest-child-abuse-case-in-us.html
Bert Hyman
news:db08b8ab-def7-4256...@u69g2000hse.googlegroups.com:
> But what about the young women and girls in this nation? Who looks
> after there safety?
>
Apparently lots of people. Otherwise this incident wouldn't be in the
news, would it?
--
Bert Hyman | St. Paul, MN | be...@iphouse.com
tiny dancer
"Bert Hyman" <be...@iphouse.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9A8367CFB3A...@127.0.0.1...
> gmail98...@yahoo.com (Angelocracy.com) wrote in
> news:db08b8ab-def7-4256...@u69g2000hse.googlegroups.com:
>
>> But what about the young women and girls in this nation? Who looks
>> after there safety?
>>
>
> Apparently lots of people. Otherwise this incident wouldn't be in the
> news, would it?
It certainly too *us* a long time to even 'notice' 'em though, didn't it? I
mean, these people have been living like this for generations. *We* have
generations of young girls being married off to old coots, and generations
of 'lost boys' being banished to cut down on competition. After all, if all
these old coots are marryin' six, eight, ten girls, what's left for the
young men but banishment from the commune? There are just so many females
to go 'round, ya know?
td
"john p"
wrote:
> "Bert Hyman" <b...@iphouse.com> wrote in message
>
> news:Xns9A8367CFB3A...@127.0.0.1...
>
> > gmail987654...@yahoo.com (Angelocracy.com) wrote in
> >news:db08b8ab-def7-4256...@u69g2000hse.googlegroups.com:
>
> >> But what about the young women and girls in this nation? Who looks
> >> after there safety?
>
> > Apparently lots of people. Otherwise this incident wouldn't be in the
> > news, would it?
>
> It certainly too *us* a long time to even 'notice' 'em though, didn't it? I
> mean, these people have been living like this for generations. *We* have
> generations of young girls being married off to old coots, and generations
> of 'lost boys' being banished to cut down on competition. After all, if all
> these old coots are marryin' six, eight, ten girls, what's left for the
> young men but banishment from the commune? There are just so many females
> to go 'round, ya know?
>
> td
>
>
>
> > --
It is unfortunate that the government couldn't have removed the kids
from the dangerous mormon cult a couple hundred years ago.
Diana
"Bert Hyman" <be...@iphouse.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9A8367CFB3A...@127.0.0.1...
> gmail98...@yahoo.com (Angelocracy.com) wrote in
> news:db08b8ab-def7-4256...@u69g2000hse.googlegroups.com:
>
>> But what about the young women and girls in this nation? Who looks
>> after there safety?
>>
>
> Apparently lots of people. Otherwise this incident wouldn't be in the
> news, would it?
You mean like the McMartin pre-school trials, and the Salem witch trials?
Bert Hyman
wrote:
>
> "Bert Hyman" <be...@iphouse.com> wrote in message
> news:Xns9A8367CFB3A...@127.0.0.1...
>> gmail98...@yahoo.com (Angelocracy.com) wrote in
>> news:db08b8ab-def7-4256...@u69g2000hse.googlegroups.com
>> :
>>
>>> But what about the young women and girls in this nation? Who looks
>>> after there safety?
>>>
>>
>> Apparently lots of people. Otherwise this incident wouldn't be in the
>> news, would it?
>
> You mean like the McMartin pre-school trials, and the Salem witch
> trials?
What about 'em?
How, exactly, do you mean to apply the lessons from those incidents to
this incident? How should they be applied in general?
Kris Baker
news:8rQNj.21338$El4.17853@trnddc05...
>
> "Bert Hyman" <be...@iphouse.com> wrote in message
> news:Xns9A8367CFB3A...@127.0.0.1...
>> gmail98...@yahoo.com (Angelocracy.com) wrote in
>> news:db08b8ab-def7-4256...@u69g2000hse.googlegroups.com:
>>
>>> But what about the young women and girls in this nation? Who looks
>>> after there safety?
>>>
>>
>> Apparently lots of people. Otherwise this incident wouldn't be in the
>> news, would it?
>
> You mean like the McMartin pre-school trials, and the Salem witch trials?
Do you seriously believe there's a comparison? Why?
Are you LDS/FLDS?
Had you even heard anything of these real issues, prior to April 4th?
Kris
Diana
The first and most important lesson to be learned from them is this: don't
believe everything the government tells you.
In THIS case, take Texas' charges with a huge barrel of salt.
Diana
"Kris Baker" <kris....@prodigy.net> wrote in message
news:wTQNj.4580$iK6....@nlpi069.nbdc.sbc.com...
You know I"m LDS. That's not exactly a secret. However, this has nothing to
do with my religion. It has EVERYTHING to do with the way this raid was
handled, and how the after math of it is being handled. I did not, and do
not, agree with the FLDS lifestyle, or polygamy.
I agree even less with authorities entering that compound on the pretense of
a fraudulent phone call, telling a hundred mothers to go into one room to be
questioned by police while they left their children in another--upon the
promise of the authorities that they would be reunited with their kids after
the questioning--only to be told that the only way ANY of them would ever
see their children again is if they asked to be sent to a domestic violence
shelter and made a complaint against the FLDS compound.
Oh, I love this; everyone here is so aghast at the lifestyles of these FLDS
folks. No polygamy, nope.
So they go in and destroy the lives of 400 children, removing them from
their mothers, and lying to everybody concerned, putting those kids in a
foster care system that is utterly incapable of dealing with them.
They are 'saved' from the horrors of a lifestyle you don't like, and their
lives are now absolutely certain to be ruined, but that's just fine, isn't
it? No polygamy. Never mind that their security is destroyed and their
families have been broken, they will never have to wear long blue dresses
with puffy sleeves.
This entire thing is making me gag.
Poe
Diana,
I respect your LDS affiliation, and honestly don't care about polygamy,
either. But wouldn't you agree it is harmful to force underage girls
into sex with men nowhere near their age, and into a lifetime of child
rearing, instead of making an informed choice to get into all that?
I, too, think things will be very difficult for these children in a
number of ways - foster homes often are not wonderful, the children will
be unprepared for the outside world, some may have suffered some abuse
(I read there was the equivalent of water-boarding to stop babies from
crying). So I *really* feel for the children. But FLDS sounds as if it
was, and has been for some time, breaking US and state laws WRT child
sexual abuse, other physical abuse, psychological abuse, and neglect.
Hopefully you'll consider my comments in the spirit I mean them. I am
not against alternative lifestyles provided those involved want to be
there, and know their options.
seastew
wrote:
> http://angelocracy.blogspot.com/2008/04/flds-largest-child-abuse-case...
>
> http://angelocracy.blogspot.com
>
> this case is not about polygamy,I don't care how adult men and women
> chose to live. This case is about child abuse. This is about girls
> 13,14, and 16 years old marrying men in their 30's and 40's. This is
> about 16 year old girls who have had 3 babies. This girls never go to
> public school. Never have much contact with the outside world.,
>
> We say how great it is how we might have a women as President. We talk
> about the freedom that the young girls of Iraq and Afghanistan now
> have. We talk about the women not having to ware Burqa anymore.
>
> But what about the young women and girls in this nation? Who looks
> after there safety?
>
> We should all be ashamed.
>
In addition, a lot of the people in these sects appear to be inbred.
Limited gene pool, I believe.
Lars Eighner
Diana broadcast on alt.true-crime:
> "Kris Baker" <kris....@prodigy.net> wrote in message
> news:wTQNj.4580$iK6....@nlpi069.nbdc.sbc.com...
>> "Diana" <dian...@noyoudont.com> wrote in message
>> news:8rQNj.21338$El4.17853@trnddc05...
>>>
>>> "Bert Hyman" <be...@iphouse.com> wrote in message
>>> news:Xns9A8367CFB3A...@127.0.0.1...
>>>> gmail98...@yahoo.com (Angelocracy.com) wrote in
>>>> news:db08b8ab-def7-4256...@u69g2000hse.googlegroups.com:
>>>>
>>>>> But what about the young women and girls in this nation? Who looks
>>>>> after there safety?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Apparently lots of people. Otherwise this incident wouldn't be in the
>>>> news, would it?
>>>
>>> You mean like the McMartin pre-school trials, and the Salem witch trials?
>>
>> Do you seriously believe there's a comparison? Why?
>> Are you LDS/FLDS?
>>
>> Had you even heard anything of these real issues, prior to April 4th?
> You know I"m LDS.
So you *are* in on it: Latter Day Shorteyes.
> That's not exactly a secret. However, this has nothing to
> do with my religion. It has EVERYTHING to do with the way this raid was
> handled, and how the after math of it is being handled. I did not, and do
> not, agree with the FLDS lifestyle, or polygamy.
Sure you do. There are not some "good" Mormons and some "bad" Mormons. The
supposedly "good" Mormons have been covering up for these guys for years.
The Mormon church from day one was a fraud to perpetuate pedophilia, and you
know it. "Gold plates" indeed!
> I agree even less with authorities entering that compound on the pretense
> of a fraudulent phone call,
Texas law requires allegations of child abuse be investigated even when the
complaint is made by an *anonymous* caller.
That underaged girls were pregnant was evident to any observer. There
simply is no doubt that child rape has occurred.
> telling a hundred mothers to go into one room to be questioned by police
> while they left their children in another--upon the promise of the
> authorities that they would be reunited with their kids after the
> questioning--only to be told that the only way ANY of them would ever see
> their children again is if they asked to be sent to a domestic violence
> shelter and made a complaint against the FLDS compound.
Mothers cannot consent for their children to be raped. If they allow it,
they are as guilty of rape as the actual perpetrator. The clear evidence
that girls were raped is that some of them are pregnant. No angel with a
stack of gold plates did that. Flesh and blood men did it while the flesh
and blood mothers stood by and did nothing. Somehow, magic underwear
doesn't prevent rapists from consumating their disgusting acts.
> Oh, I love this; everyone here is so aghast at the lifestyles of these
> FLDS folks. No polygamy, nope.
Polygamy is against the law in Texas, and in fact, Texas recently passed a
constitutional amendment enshrining the prohibition on polygamy in the state
constitution. In Utah the "good" Mormons wink at polygamy; that won't wash
in Texas. Even so, the latter day shorteyes probably would never have been
bothered if they had not decided to rape children.
> So they go in and destroy the lives of 400 children,
Oh, like raping a 14-year-girl doesn't ruin her life. And what do you think
becomes of the excess boys?
> removing them from their mothers, and lying to everybody concerned,
> putting those kids in a foster care system that is utterly incapable of
> dealing with them.
> They are 'saved' from the horrors of a lifestyle you don't like,
Child rape is a 'lifestyle' now?
> and their lives are now absolutely certain to be ruined, but that's just
> fine, isn't it? No polygamy. Never mind that their security is destroyed
> and their families have been broken, they will never have to wear long
> blue dresses with puffy sleeves.
> This entire thing is making me gag.
Yeah, mormonism is gaggy.
--
Lars Eighner <http://larseighner.com/> use...@larseighner.com
Countdown: 277 days to go.
Kickin' Ass and Takin' Names
> "Kris Baker" <kris.ba...@prodigy.net> wrote in message
>
> news:wTQNj.4580$iK6....@nlpi069.nbdc.sbc.com...
>
>
>
>
>
> > "Diana" <diana...@noyoudont.com> wrote in message
> >news:8rQNj.21338$El4.17853@trnddc05...
>
> >> "Bert Hyman" <b...@iphouse.com> wrote in message
> >>news:Xns9A8367CFB3A...@127.0.0.1...
> >>> gmail987654...@yahoo.com (Angelocracy.com) wrote in
> >>>news:db08b8ab-def7-4256...@u69g2000hse.googlegroups.com:
>
> >>>> But what about the young women and girls in this nation? Who looks
> >>>> after there safety?
>
> >>> Apparently lots of people. Otherwise this incident wouldn't be in the
> >>> news, would it?
>
> >> You mean like the McMartin pre-school trials, and the Salem witch trials?
>
> > Do you seriously believe there's a comparison? Why?
> > Are you LDS/FLDS?
>
> > Had you even heard anything of these real issues, prior to April 4th?
>
> You know I"m LDS. That's not exactly a secret. However, this has nothing to
> do with my religion. It has EVERYTHING to do with the way this raid was
> handled, and how the after math of it is being handled. I did not, and do
> not, agree with the FLDS lifestyle, or polygamy.
>
> I agree even less with authorities entering that compound on the pretense of
> a fraudulent phone call,
Any proof that the phone call was fraudulent?
The fact that they can't find "Sarah" doesn't mean much -- girl could
have been using an assumed name; could have been an escapee who
decided to blow the whistle.
With your claim of "fraudulent phone call," you are ignoring what they
found there -- and what everyone knew was going on for years. Should
have clamped down on the child abusers a long time ago.
> telling a hundred mothers to go into one room to be
> questioned by police while they left their children in another--upon the
> promise of the authorities that they would be reunited with their kids after
> the questioning--only to be told that the only way ANY of them would ever
> see their children again is if they asked to be sent to a domestic violence
> shelter and made a complaint against the FLDS compound.
The children have no birth certificates and many of the children DO
NOT KNOW WHO THEIR PARENTS ARE.
>
> Oh, I love this; everyone here is so aghast at the lifestyles of these FLDS
> folks. No polygamy, nope.
>
> So they go in and destroy the lives of 400 children,
Yep, these children were living fine, normal, wholesome lives up until
the raid. Youbetcha.
> removing them from
> their mothers, and lying to everybody concerned, putting those kids in a
> foster care system that is utterly incapable of dealing with them.
>
> They are 'saved' from the horrors of a lifestyle you don't like, and their
> lives are now absolutely certain to be ruined, but that's just fine, isn't
> it? No polygamy. Never mind that their security is destroyed and their
> families have been broken, they will never have to wear long blue dresses
> with puffy sleeves.
>
> This entire thing is making me gag.
Gag on this, fool.
- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Kris Baker
How would I know (or care) you're LDS? Your nym looks familiar,
but as someone I long ago killfiled.
You anti-government folks are the types that keep these PEDOPHILE-
dream religions going.
I don't think anyone here gives a crap about polygamy itself.
We do, however, care about the rape of young girls....and the
grooming of their sexual lives.
I'm surprised that an LDS person would support such pedophilia.
Kris
"john p"
They came from Utah where half the state is inbred.
Kel Varnsen
My guess is that the posters Kris Baker, Pinky and Brandy are probably
identical in looks as these so called women from the FLDS. Am I right
or am I right!
"john p"
> In our last episode, <78SNj.88$fC5.82@trnddc02>, the lovely and talented
> Diana broadcast on alt.true-crime:
>
>
>
> >news:wTQNj.4580$iK6....@nlpi069.nbdc.sbc.com...
> >> "Diana" <diana...@noyoudont.com> wrote in message
> >>news:8rQNj.21338$El4.17853@trnddc05...
>
> >>> "Bert Hyman" <b...@iphouse.com> wrote in message
> >>>news:Xns9A8367CFB3A...@127.0.0.1...
> >>>> gmail987654...@yahoo.com (Angelocracy.com) wrote in
much because FLDS are practicing pure mormonism. But many of them
don't like to be reminded of their perverted beginnings.
> > So they go in and destroy the lives of 400 children,
>
> Oh, like raping a 14-year-girl doesn't ruin her life. And what do you think
> becomes of the excess boys?
>
In early mormonism castration was an option.
> > removing them from their mothers, and lying to everybody concerned,
> > putting those kids in a foster care system that is utterly incapable of
> > dealing with them.
> > They are 'saved' from the horrors of a lifestyle you don't like,
>
> Child rape is a 'lifestyle' now?
>
It is in mormonism. Joseph Smith Jun., mormon founding "prophet" had
30+ wives 11 of whom were between the ages of 11 and 20. He liked
them old and young.
http://www.lds-mormon.com/12117.shtml
> > and their lives are now absolutely certain to be ruined, but that's just
> > fine, isn't it? No polygamy. Never mind that their security is destroyed
> > and their families have been broken, they will never have to wear long
> > blue dresses with puffy sleeves.
> > This entire thing is making me gag.
>
> Yeah, mormonism is gaggy.
>
> --
> Lars Eighner <http://larseighner.com/> use...@larseighner.com
> Countdown: 277 days to go.
Mormon perverts are into the gaggy stuff and old peoples underwear.
Kris Baker
""john p"" <john....@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:7b3df3e7-b92d-43b1...@f36g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
It's actually been as prevalent in other states; the Mormons
did start in New York, you know.
For example, Mitt Romney (who comes from polygamy) is not
a Utahn:
http://www.slate.com/id/2140539/
Michael Snyder
"Angelocracy.com" <gmail98...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:db08b8ab-def7-4256...@u69g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
>
http://angelocracy.blogspot.com/2008/04/flds-largest-child-abuse-case-in-us.html
>
> http://angelocracy.blogspot.com
>
>
> this case is not about polygamy,
Yeah -- right.
> I don't care how adult men and women chose to live.
Non sequitur. This case is not about what you do or
do not care about.
> This case is about child abuse.
Uh-huh. It's all about the CHILL-drun.
Won't somebody PLEASE think about the CHILL-drun!
> We say how great it is how we might have a women as President. We talk
> about the freedom that the young girls of Iraq and Afghanistan now
> have. We talk about the women not having to ware Burqa anymore.
>
> But what about the young women and girls in this nation? Who looks
> after there safety?
You're kidding, right? Young women in this nation are the
most protected and privileged group of people in the history
of humanity.
Chocolic
"Michael Snyder" <msn...@socmen.org> wrote in message
news:48082750$0$2074$742e...@news.sonic.net...
Your post made no sense, you're loozin it Snyder.
Chocolic
timeOday
of children from their parents because they belonged to the same church
as a parent who who was accused anonymously by somebody who now will not
come forward.
I'm sure there are some guys guilty of statutory rape in that town. But
taking hundreds of kids from their families en masse is a very
wrongheaded reaction which will surely be struck down once the cases get
to a higher court.
Charlie Wilkes
> Diana wrote:
>> "Kris Baker" <kris....@prodigy.net> wrote in message
>> news:wTQNj.4580$iK6....@nlpi069.nbdc.sbc.com...
>>> "Diana" <dian...@noyoudont.com> wrote in message
>>> news:8rQNj.21338$El4.17853@trnddc05...
>>>> "Bert Hyman" <be...@iphouse.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:Xns9A8367CFB3A...@127.0.0.1...
>>>>> gmail98...@yahoo.com (Angelocracy.com) wrote in
>>>>> news:db08b8ab-
def7-4256-99c...@u69g2000hse.googlegroups.com:
Interesting comments from both of you.
I agree FLDS should not be allowed to operate outside the law just
because they are a religious colony with unusual beliefs and customs.
But I wonder if the police are doing more harm than good because of how
they have handled their enforcement operation. A better approach might
have been to leave the colony intact (except for anyone who wanted to
leave) while investigating systematically and putting evidence in front
of a grand jury.
Charlie
Lars Eighner
lovely and talented timeOday broadcast on alt.true-crime:
> Calling it a "case" is a stretch. What they have done is take hundreds
> of children from their parents because they belonged to the same church
> as a parent who who was accused anonymously by somebody who now will not
> come forward.
Bullshit. There was clear evidence in the number of pregnant girls that
crimes had been committed.
> I'm sure there are some guys guilty of statutory rape in that town. But
> taking hundreds of kids from their families en masse is a very wrongheaded
> reaction which will surely be struck down once the cases get to a higher
> court.
What "families" would those be?
The state is on well-tested and firm ground. Where some children have been
raped, the state can --- and in fact is obligated --- to remove all children
from the abusive situation.
Lars Eighner
lovely and talented Charlie Wilkes broadcast on alt.true-crime:
> Interesting comments from both of you.
> I agree FLDS should not be allowed to operate outside the law just
> because they are a religious colony with unusual beliefs and customs.
> But I wonder if the police are doing more harm than good because of how
> they have handled their enforcement operation. A better approach might
> have been to leave the colony intact (except for anyone who wanted to
> leave) while investigating systematically and putting evidence in front
> of a grand jury.
The law does not provide that kind of option where there is clear evidence
of sexual abuse of children.
"john p"
> ""john p"" <john.ph...@gmail.com> wrote in message
The inbreeding didn't start until they moved to Utah.
tiny dancer
"Lars Eighner" <use...@larseighner.com> wrote in message
news:slrng0gi69....@debranded.larseighner.com...
> In our last episode, <pan.2008.04...@users.easynews.com>, the
> lovely and talented Charlie Wilkes broadcast on alt.true-crime:
>
>
>
>> Interesting comments from both of you.
>
>> I agree FLDS should not be allowed to operate outside the law just
>> because they are a religious colony with unusual beliefs and customs.
>> But I wonder if the police are doing more harm than good because of how
>> they have handled their enforcement operation. A better approach might
>> have been to leave the colony intact (except for anyone who wanted to
>> leave) while investigating systematically and putting evidence in front
>> of a grand jury.
>
> The law does not provide that kind of option where there is clear evidence
> of sexual abuse of children.
Leaving the children in the environment where they are being raped hardly
seems like a *good* choice to me. Especially wiith the people who have
indoctrinated them that this is *right* and *just* behavior. The poor kids
have already been fucked up enough as it is.
td
krp
>
>>>> But what about the young women and girls in this nation? Who looks
>>>> after there safety?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Apparently lots of people. Otherwise this incident wouldn't be in the
>>> news, would it?
>>
>> You mean like the McMartin pre-school trials, and the Salem witch
>> trials?
>
> What about 'em?
>
> How, exactly, do you mean to apply the lessons from those incidents to
> this incident? How should they be applied in general?
Given the HISTORY of McMartin, Wenatchee, the Duke case, Salem, and
Waco - a little CAUTION before believing every word a social worker feeds
you.
krp
"Poe" <hau...@terrible-thought.com> wrote in message
news:66q9uoF...@mid.individual.net...
> I respect your LDS affiliation, and honestly don't care about polygamy,
> either. But wouldn't you agree it is harmful to force underage girls into
> sex with men nowhere near their age, and into a lifetime of child rearing,
> instead of making an informed choice to get into all that?
Sure it is! IF that is what was REALLY happening. Only YOU guys seem to
KNOW the ultimate truth here. To an absolute certainty. Some of us don't.
Given history we wait a bit to see before we "string em up!" Personally I
find polygamy a repulsive idea FOR ME. I'm a one woman kind of guy. How many
ATC members were 10,000% SURE the Duke players HORRIBLY raped poor Crystal
Mangum? REPEATEDLY and without any compassion or mercy? How many folks here
were cheering on the tanks with flame throwers at the Waco compound POSITIVE
that all kinds of kids were being raped?
I had a great opportunity as a CATHOLIC to live in Mormon land (Salt
Lake City) and work for a radio station there. So all of this LDS shit is
nothing new to me. I was exposed to LOTS of disgruntled EX-Mormons and their
stories of the HORRORS of Mormonism. I was handed a booklet by a former
Mormon (or she claimed to be) by the name of Tanner. She related an
elaborate story of rapes and sexual goings on in the Salt Lake Mormon
Temple. In it she claimed that the "Elders" were setting up a session for a
GANG RAPE of her, and how she had to LEAP to safety of the great salt lake
from the 3rd floor window. At first I was shocked. Until I realized that it
would have been one HELL of a leap since the salt lake is something like 35
MILES to the northwest of the temple. Then I started to wonder when I
noticed that the stained glass windows didn't open. I concluded it WAS
bullshit when I learned that the salt lake at that point was little more
than ankle deep and a leap EVEN IF you could have made it would most likely
have been fatal.
You know there are former Catholics (Phil Donahue) that have all sorts
of bullshit to say about our church. MAYBE he says it because he was an
adulterer and has a guilty conscience. I listened to all sorts of former
Mormons tell me stories for our news. 99% of it turned out to be bullshit.
I have NO way of knowing the ultimate truth of what REALLY was happening
with that group. I would suspect that at least SOME of it has some truth to
it. In any closed group some crap is bound to happen. I doubt that any
religious group is free of some perverts in their midst. The secrecy and
closed nature of the group is a huge mistake in my book. BUT on the other
hand - I am almost willing to BET that sexual abuse of kids is MORE
prevalent out here in the "world" than in a closed highly religious group.
Having lived among the Mormons it was my observation that they are among the
MOST prudish sexually repressed folks I ever met.
Rather than see them as sex maniacs I'd suspect that Mormon girls had their
vaginas sewn shut at birth! Sorry Diana. (I was single when I lived in
Utah. I did NOT find LDS gals at all interesting.) Oh they were pretty
enough and nice enough.
krp
"Lars Eighner" <use...@larseighner.com> wrote in message
news:slrng0gi69....@debranded.larseighner.com...
> lovely and talented Charlie Wilkes broadcast on alt.true-crime:
>
>
>
>> Interesting comments from both of you.
>
>> I agree FLDS should not be allowed to operate outside the law just
>> because they are a religious colony with unusual beliefs and customs.
>> But I wonder if the police are doing more harm than good because of how
>> they have handled their enforcement operation. A better approach might
>> have been to leave the colony intact (except for anyone who wanted to
>> leave) while investigating systematically and putting evidence in front
>> of a grand jury.
>
> The law does not provide that kind of option where there is clear evidence
> of sexual abuse of children.
Again Lars you are so POSITIVE............
krp
"tiny dancer" <tinyda...@nospamhotmail.com> wrote in message
news:7ZXNj.9394$tG6....@bignews1.bellsouth.net...
>>
>>> Interesting comments from both of you.
>>
>>> I agree FLDS should not be allowed to operate outside the law just
>>> because they are a religious colony with unusual beliefs and customs.
>>> But I wonder if the police are doing more harm than good because of how
>>> they have handled their enforcement operation. A better approach might
>>> have been to leave the colony intact (except for anyone who wanted to
>>> leave) while investigating systematically and putting evidence in front
>>> of a grand jury.
>>
>> The law does not provide that kind of option where there is clear
>> evidence
>> of sexual abuse of children.
>
>
> Leaving the children in the environment where they are being raped hardly
> seems like a *good* choice to me.
like then GOD DAMN Duke players raping the little black girl, right
Tiny!
krp
> Utah mormons have mixed feelings about FLDS. They can't hate them too
> much because FLDS are practicing pure mormonism. But many of them
> don't like to be reminded of their perverted beginnings.
Perverted? Polygamy is perverted? Interesting. Throughout the Bible it
was practiced, even in the time of Christ. Maybe I missed him condemning it?
Polygamy is still practiced in many places today. Most of Islam still
practices polygamy. So they ALL are PERVERTS John?
Polygamy is something I could never accept for myself, it runs against
the grain of MY personal beliefs. But then so do all sorts of things of
various religions. I try to let the next guy believe as he or she wants. I
also don't break out in a sweat when a gay guy enters the room I am in.
That's THEIR choice. So long as it doesn't hurt anyone. I just believe in
freedom of religion, even when I don't like it. Even Wicca or Satanism.
krp
"Kickin' Ass and Takin' Names" <PopUl...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:8144fcff-3023-4d96...@59g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
>
> >>>> But what about the young women and girls in this nation? Who looks
> >>>> after there safety?
>
> >>> Apparently lots of people. Otherwise this incident wouldn't be in the
> >>> news, would it?
>
> >> You mean like the McMartin pre-school trials, and the Salem witch
> >> trials?
>
> > Do you seriously believe there's a comparison? Why?
> > Are you LDS/FLDS?
>
> > Had you even heard anything of these real issues, prior to April 4th?
>
> You know I"m LDS. That's not exactly a secret. However, this has nothing
> to
> do with my religion. It has EVERYTHING to do with the way this raid was
> handled, and how the after math of it is being handled. I did not, and do
> not, agree with the FLDS lifestyle, or polygamy.
>
> I agree even less with authorities entering that compound on the pretense
> of
> a fraudulent phone call,
< Any proof that the phone call was fraudulent?
You have it backwards. Any proof it ISN'T fraudulent?
krp
>> >> > this case is not about polygamy,I don't care how adult men and women
>> >> > chose to live. This case is about child abuse. This is about girls
>> >> > 13,14, and 16 years old marrying men in their 30's and 40's. This is
>> >> > about 16 year old girls who have had 3 babies. This girls never go
>> >> > to
>> >> > public school. Never have much contact with the outside world.,
>>
>> >> > We say how great it is how we might have a women as President. We
>> >> > talk
>> >> > about the freedom that the young girls of Iraq and Afghanistan now
>> >> > have. We talk about the women not having to ware Burqa anymore.
>>
>> >> > But what about the young women and girls in this nation? Who looks
>> >> > after there safety?
>>
>> >> > We should all be ashamed.
>>
>> >> >http://angelocracy.blogspot.com/2008/04/flds-largest-child-abuse-case...
>>
>> >> In addition, a lot of the people in these sects appear to be inbred.
>> >> Limited gene pool, I believe.
>>
>> > They came from Utah where half the state is inbred.
>>
>> It's actually been as prevalent in other states; the Mormons
>> did start in New York, you know.
>>
>> For example, Mitt Romney (who comes from polygamy) is not
>> a Utahn:http://www.slate.com/id/2140539/
>
> The inbreeding didn't start until they moved to Utah.
THAT is bullshit on so MANY levels. First is that polygamy predated the
Utah move. It was part of what got them in trouble as far back as Palmyra in
new York in the 1830's, it was central to what pissed off the folks in
Missouri and Illinois. Also the Mormons were bringing in LOTS of "breeding
stock" from Europe so there was little "inbreeding."
"john p"
> "Diana" <diana...@noyoudont.com> wrote in message
>
> news:78SNj.88$fC5.82@trnddc02...
>
>
>
>
>
> > "Kris Baker" <kris.ba...@prodigy.net> wrote in message
> >news:wTQNj.4580$iK6....@nlpi069.nbdc.sbc.com...
> >> "Diana" <diana...@noyoudont.com> wrote in message
> >>news:8rQNj.21338$El4.17853@trnddc05...
>
> >>> "Bert Hyman" <b...@iphouse.com> wrote in message
> >>>news:Xns9A8367CFB3A...@127.0.0.1...
> >>>> gmail987654...@yahoo.com (Angelocracy.com) wrote in
I met with a libertarian friend today and asked his opinion about this
whole mess, and he shared the common sense view that when kids are
getting raped the authorities do need to step in. I'm only hearing
mormons and perverts condemning Texas for removing the kids. If
adults want to live in a polygamist relationship, I don't care, but
what is happening in the mormon texas cult is sickening.
Bo Raxo
Lars, that was the best damn commentary I've seen on this subject, I just
wanted to give you a big huge slab o' props. Everything I thought of saying,
you said, except better.
Bo Raxo
Bo Raxo
Poe
It is a mess, that's for sure. I think it could have been handled more
deliberately with forethought. FLDS seems to have been on LE radar for
quite a while, so LE and CPS should have considered the possibility that
at some point there could be a large-scale removal of children. And
these children in particular have been so sheltered and led to fear so
much, and that wreaking havoc on their lives would be psychologically
and emotionally damaging to these kids even more so than kids accustomed
to us evil outsiders.
I am really not sure exactly what could have been done here, but it is a
giant cluster now. I fear that what we'll end up with is a lost
generation of these children, who can't go back because it won't be
allowed, but also cannot go forward with happy, fruitful lives the way
many would like because of the damage done to them from the time they
were born thru to this jarring upheaval in their lives. Hopefully plenty
of counseling will be provided, but due to this mass processing it may
end up being insufficient. I hope, but can't see, a good ending to this.
Poe
> "Poe" <hau...@terrible-thought.com> wrote in message
> news:66q9uoF...@mid.individual.net...
>
>> I respect your LDS affiliation, and honestly don't care about polygamy,
>> either. But wouldn't you agree it is harmful to force underage girls into
>> sex with men nowhere near their age, and into a lifetime of child rearing,
>> instead of making an informed choice to get into all that?
>
>
> Sure it is! IF that is what was REALLY happening. Only YOU guys seem to
> KNOW the ultimate truth here. To an absolute certainty. Some of us don't.
> Given history we wait a bit to see before we "string em up!" Personally I
> find polygamy a repulsive idea FOR ME. I'm a one woman kind of guy. How many
> ATC members were 10,000% SURE the Duke players HORRIBLY raped poor Crystal
> Mangum? REPEATEDLY and without any compassion or mercy? How many folks here
> were cheering on the tanks with flame throwers at the Waco compound POSITIVE
> that all kinds of kids were being raped?
>
I think that there was a reasonable suspicion that the call (now in
question, I guess) was valid and a minor was at risk. It warranted a
look, especially considering her complaint was consistent with stories
told by women who have left FLDS, and with general hearsay about antics
that go on there (idk the source of of it all).
And sure, false reports of bad things are made all the time, and some
who hear them get way too riled up before the facts all come out, but
that doesn't mean a complaint should never be investigated.
Kel Varnsen
In a way aren't all people in Utah inbred?
Peter Dworkin
wrote:
>
>"Kris Baker" <kris....@prodigy.net> wrote in message
>news:wTQNj.4580$iK6....@nlpi069.nbdc.sbc.com...
>> "Diana" <dian...@noyoudont.com> wrote in message
>> news:8rQNj.21338$El4.17853@trnddc05...
>>>
>>> "Bert Hyman" <be...@iphouse.com> wrote in message
>>> news:Xns9A8367CFB3A...@127.0.0.1...
>>>> gmail98...@yahoo.com (Angelocracy.com) wrote in
>>>> news:db08b8ab-def7-4256...@u69g2000hse.googlegroups.com:
>>>>
>> Are you LDS/FLDS?
>>
>> Had you even heard anything of these real issues, prior to April 4th?
>
>You know I"m LDS. That's not exactly a secret. However, this has nothing to
>do with my religion. It has EVERYTHING to do with the way this raid was
>handled, and how the after math of it is being handled. I did not, and do
>not, agree with the FLDS lifestyle, or polygamy.
>
>Oh, I love this; everyone here is so aghast at the lifestyles of these FLDS
>folks. No polygamy, nope.
Have you entirely thought this through? My objection is not to the
manner of dress, but to underage children being forced to have sexual
relations with much older men. I think that is a reasonable
objection.
Good luck to anyone trying to learn Aramaic.
I need a Toltec calendar with Hebrew glyphs.
Kind regards,
Peter
Lars Eighner
talented krp broadcast on alt.true-crime:
Some of the girls are pregnant. That's pretty clear.
Lars Eighner
talented krp broadcast on alt.true-crime:
No little girl involved.
tiny dancer
Nothing concerning females is ever clear to krp. Like mikey, wimmins and
chillun is bad.
< disgusted >
And I'm mighty tired of the interviews with those robotic *mothers* paraded
around on the talk shows.
td
Deadrat
news:Xns9A84109...@chinanet.cn.hk:
> On 18 Apr 2008, Lars Eighner <use...@larseighner.com> posted some
> news:slrng0gi08....@debranded.larseighner.com:
>
>> In our last episode, <Zt-dnZ87o-9vrZXV...@comcast.com>,
>> the lovely and talented timeOday broadcast on alt.true-crime:
>>
>>> Calling it a "case" is a stretch. What they have done is take
>>> hundreds of children from their parents because they belonged to the
>>> same church as a parent who who was accused anonymously by somebody
>>> who now will not come forward.
>>
>> Bullshit. There was clear evidence in the number of pregnant girls
>> that crimes had been committed.
>
> That's not evidence of anything other than they had sex and didn't use
> protection.
Children under 16 may not marry in Texas; Children between the ages of 16
and 18 may marry with parental consent, but this consent must be given
before the marriage license is issued via forms available from the county
clerk. Sex with a non-spouse under 17 is called indeceny with a child and
is a felony unless the child's partner is no more than 3 years older (and
of the opposite sex).
I'll agree that not much is clear in this case, but it should be fairly
easy to tell whether a crime has been committed.
<snip>
>> The state is on well-tested and firm ground. Where some children have
>> been raped, the state can --- and in fact is obligated --- to remove
>> all children from the abusive situation.
>
> The state has nothing. Where's the mystery 16 year old cunt who made
> the phone call? Even the DPS said there was no evidence of sexual
> abuse.
There's no need to demonstrate "abuse."
> They obtained the warrant on false grounds and it will all be
> thrown out of court.
Possibly. They claim there was a 911 call, so there should be a record.
Even if that were a hoax, the authorities acted in good faith, so I doubt
the warrant would be thrown out.
> It's Waco time in Texas again.
If this had been Waco again, everyone in the compound would already be
dead.
Merlin
how would we begin?
what would we do?
the authorities were finally able to act upon receipt of a phone call.
the nature of the phone call does not outweigh the discovery.
what the police found seems major enough for them to continue
investigating.
the children are confused or acting out as told by not identifying
themselves.
the question is why the mothers would say, if true, that no one was
forced into these relationships? what bearing would this have on
children being forced into marriage and child bearing? were the
mothers of those children the system is trying to help.... were those
mothers treated as children the same way these children are alleged to
have been treated? can you say maybe? where a mother as a child was
raised by sexually hungry men would see this child rearing situation
as normal?
we need sex ed in christian sunday schools. we need sexual education
period, how to defend ourselves, how to make choices. how to complain
and stop events from happening when we know they are wrong....... we
are not taught sexaul defense nor sex education by our churches, it is
important.
who has a fighting chance when no chance is offered?
those that seem to allow the victimization of children are acting like
they are the victims. when it is the children that seem like the true
victims.
sincerely,
merlin
>On Apr 18, 4:42 am, " krp" <krp24...@verizon.net> wrote:
> "Bert Hyman" <b...@iphouse.com> wrote in message
Kris Baker
"Charlie Wilkes" <charlie...@users.easynews.com> wrote in message
news:pan.2008.04...@users.easynews.com...
> On Thu, 17 Apr 2008 20:56:03 -0400, Poe wrote:
>
>>> "Kris Baker" <kris....@prodigy.net> wrote in message
>>> news:wTQNj.4580$iK6....@nlpi069.nbdc.sbc.com...
>>>> "Diana" <dian...@noyoudont.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:8rQNj.21338$El4.17853@trnddc05...
>>>>> "Bert Hyman" <be...@iphouse.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:Xns9A8367CFB3A...@127.0.0.1...
>>>>>> gmail98...@yahoo.com (Angelocracy.com) wrote in
>>>>>> news:db08b8ab-
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> But what about the young women and girls in this nation? Who looks
>>>>>>> after there safety?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Apparently lots of people. Otherwise this incident wouldn't be in
>>>>>> the news, would it?
>>>>> You mean like the McMartin pre-school trials, and the Salem witch
>>>>> trials?
>>>> LDS/FLDS?
>>>>
>>>> Had you even heard anything of these real issues, prior to April 4th?
>>>
>>> You know I"m LDS. That's not exactly a secret. However, this has
>>> nothing to do with my religion. It has EVERYTHING to do with the way
>>> this raid was handled, and how the after math of it is being handled. I
>>> did not, and do not, agree with the FLDS lifestyle, or polygamy.
>>>
>>> pretense of a fraudulent phone call, telling a hundred mothers to go
>>> into one room to be questioned by police while they left their children
>>> in another--upon the promise of the authorities that they would be
>>> reunited with their kids after the questioning--only to be told that
>>> the only way ANY of them would ever see their children again is if they
>>> asked to be sent to a domestic violence shelter and made a complaint
>>> against the FLDS compound.
>>>
>>> FLDS folks. No polygamy, nope.
>>>
>>> their mothers, and lying to everybody concerned, putting those kids in
>>> a foster care system that is utterly incapable of dealing with them.
>>>
>>> They are 'saved' from the horrors of a lifestyle you don't like, and
>>> their lives are now absolutely certain to be ruined, but that's just
>>> fine, isn't it? No polygamy. Never mind that their security is
>>> destroyed and their families have been broken, they will never have to
>>> wear long blue dresses with puffy sleeves.
>>>
>>> This entire thing is making me gag.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Diana,
>>
>> either. But wouldn't you agree it is harmful to force underage girls
>> into sex with men nowhere near their age, and into a lifetime of child
>> rearing, instead of making an informed choice to get into all that?
>>
>> number of ways - foster homes often are not wonderful, the children will
>> be unprepared for the outside world, some may have suffered some abuse
>> (I read there was the equivalent of water-boarding to stop babies from
>> crying). So I *really* feel for the children. But FLDS sounds as if it
>> was, and has been for some time, breaking US and state laws WRT child
>> sexual abuse, other physical abuse, psychological abuse, and neglect.
>>
>> Hopefully you'll consider my comments in the spirit I mean them. I am
>> not against alternative lifestyles provided those involved want to be
>> there, and know their options.
>
>
>
>
> I agree FLDS should not be allowed to operate outside the law just
> because they are a religious colony with unusual beliefs and customs.
> But I wonder if the police are doing more harm than good because of how
> they have handled their enforcement operation. A better approach might
> have been to leave the colony intact (except for anyone who wanted to
> leave) while investigating systematically and putting evidence in front
> of a grand jury.
>
Uh, that's been tried several times in other states.
Kris
Kris Baker
>
> I met with a libertarian friend today and asked his opinion about this
> whole mess, and he shared the common sense view that when kids are
> getting raped the authorities do need to step in. I'm only hearing
> mormons and perverts condemning Texas for removing the kids. If
> adults want to live in a polygamist relationship, I don't care, but
> what is happening in the mormon texas cult is sickening.
You'd be surprised how many FLDS (and undercover LDS) are
on the boards, internet and blogs right now - posting on behalf
of the pedophiles. Most of them are on the local news boards
(ksl.com, sltrib.com and desnews.com)....but I'm seeing some
here, too.
Kris
Merlin
>
> > I respect your LDS affiliation, and honestly don't care about polygamy,
> > either. But wouldn't you agree it is harmful to force underage girls into
> > sex with men nowhere near their age, and into a lifetime of child rearing,
> > instead of making an informed choice to get into all that?
>
> Sure it is! IF that is what was REALLY happening.
so investigate? find out. right? plunge in separate the rumors from
truth.
> Only YOU guys seem to
> KNOW the ultimate truth here.
why not check out the problem........ find out what really happened,
having read many of the posts in this thread, there doesn't seem to be
a lack of curiosity about the truth.
> To an absolute certainty.
yes, let us find if there were cots in the temple.
yes, let us find out if there were unaged preganant girls?
yes, let us find out if there was any married against their will?
yes, let us find out what happend if there were any lost boys?
this can all be sorted out.
> Some of us don't.
you do want the truth to come out right?
> Given history we wait a bit to see before we "string em up!"
local gossip is one thang.
local animosity for any group is possible.
yet no one is being strung up.
questions are being ask.
are the questions fair? are the questions being answered?
merlin believes the truth can win out.
> Personally I
> find polygamy a repulsive idea FOR ME.
merlin doesn't understand the need, not into harems.
tho living with a larger family can have it's rewards.
> I'm a one woman kind of guy. How many
> ATC members were 10,000% SURE the Duke players HORRIBLY raped poor Crystal
> Mangum? REPEATEDLY and without any compassion or mercy?
good question.
tho this was the matter of a dishonest DA pushing this event.
is there one person doing that this time.
> How many folks here
> were cheering on the tanks with flame throwers at the Waco compound POSITIVE
> that all kinds of kids were being raped?
what was that situation, how did it start?
how could we have done that one better?
didn't know it was sexaul charges that time too.
thought there were some specific incidence.
> I had a great opportunity as a CATHOLIC to live in Mormon land (Salt
> Lake City) and work for a radio station there. So all of this LDS shit is
> nothing new to me. I was exposed to LOTS of disgruntled EX-Mormons and their
> stories of the HORRORS of Mormonism. I was handed a booklet by a former
> Mormon (or she claimed to be) by the name of Tanner. She related an
> elaborate story of rapes and sexual goings on in the Salt Lake Mormon
> Temple. In it she claimed that the "Elders" were setting up a session for a
> GANG RAPE of her, and how she had to LEAP to safety of the great salt lake
> from the 3rd floor window. At first I was shocked. Until I realized that it
> would have been one HELL of a leap since the salt lake is something like 35
> MILES to the northwest of the temple. Then I started to wonder when I
> noticed that the stained glass windows didn't open. I concluded it WAS
> bullshit when I learned that the salt lake at that point was little more
> than ankle deep and a leap EVEN IF you could have made it would most likely
> have been fatal.
yet none of this went to the courts.
no one was called for help?
we need to teach other how to get help.
> You know there are former Catholics (Phil Donahue) that have all sorts
> of bullshit to say about our church. MAYBE he says it because he was an
> adulterer and has a guilty conscience. I listened to all sorts of former
> Mormons tell me stories for our news. 99% of it turned out to be bullshit.
we saw the church accuse homosexauls.
now we see the pope accusing pedophiles.
that seems an improvement in those cases toward honesty at least.
yet no one that secretly managed the scandals in the church
have been taken to task.
the old boys network that runs the church is still in power
after spending years shuffling difficult cases around
their communities and the country.
when some justice is meated out at the top, and sense that the church
understand this problem might arise.
> I have NO way of knowing the ultimate truth of what REALLY was happening
> with that group.
it wasn't a group, it was each victim having their own story about
what happened to them personally. they are not a group only in the
sense they seek some justice or personal understanding of how their
trust was violated.
> I would suspect that at least SOME of it has some truth to
> it.
some? you demean them like this?
> In any closed group some crap is bound to happen.
not a good answer, the perps were moved around, so you had multiple
incidences in differing places by the same people who were moved to
keep the scandal a secret. no sex ed in christianity allows for these
solutions to seem possible. where sex education would tell the priests
to report it to the police then their superiors.
> I doubt that any
> religious group is free of some perverts in their midst.
so how do the good people monitor things and keep life simple for the
children?
> The secrecy and
> closed nature of the group is a huge mistake in my book.
yup/
? BUT on the other
> hand - I am almost willing to BET that sexual abuse of kids is MORE
> prevalent out here in the "world" than in a closed highly religious group.
you have not even touched on how the nuns are treated.
this idea that everyone does it, seems odd, when you are talking about
how the upper crust in these churches allowed it to happen.
> Having lived among the Mormons it was my observation that they are among the
> MOST prudish sexually repressed folks I ever met.
have no idea, yet is there any sexual education in your church?
> Rather than see them as sex maniacs I'd suspect that Mormon girls had their
> vaginas sewn shut at birth! Sorry Diana. (I was single when I lived in
> Utah. I did NOT find LDS gals at all interesting.) Oh they were pretty
> enough and nice enough.
you are talking as an adult about adult women............ you are not
talking about your not dating underaged girls.
sincerely,
merlin
Marianna
> I am really not sure exactly what could have been done here, but it is a
> giant cluster now. I fear that what we'll end up with is a lost
> generation of these children, who can't go back because it won't be
> allowed, but also cannot go forward with happy, fruitful lives the way
> many would like because of the damage done to them from the time they
> were born thru to this jarring upheaval in their lives.
I think the best you can hope for is that even if they are a "lost
generation", they'll be the last generation to have this bullshit
inflicted on them.
Marianna
Marianna
> > Bullshit. There was clear evidence in the number of pregnant girls
> > that crimes had been committed.
h good:
> That's not evidence of anything other than they had sex and didn't use
> protection.
If you have a pregnant 14 year old, somebody male (sorry Snyder, it
*is* men who do the impregnating) knocked her up. That's a crime at
that age. The only question is who did it, and that's easily
determined through DNA.
Marianna
Amy Guskin
(in article
<dbf692b1-474c-47b7...@24g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>):
>
> we need sex ed in christian sunday schools. we need sexual education
> period, how to defend ourselves, how to make choices. how to complain
> and stop events from happening when we know they are wrong....... we
> are not taught sexaul defense nor sex education by our churches, it is
> important. <<
But if the church in question is the FLDS, they're not going to teach those
things.
Amy
--
"In my line of work you gotta keep repeating things over and over and over
again for the truth to sink in, to kinda catapult the propaganda." - George
W. Bush, May 24, 2005
Wild Monkshood
Amy Guskin wrote:
>>>On Fri, 18 Apr 2008 11:44:58 -0400, Merlin wrote
>
> (in article
> <dbf692b1-474c-47b7...@24g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>):
>
>>we need sex ed in christian sunday schools. we need sexual education
>>period, how to defend ourselves, how to make choices. how to complain
>>and stop events from happening when we know they are wrong....... we
>>are not taught sexaul defense nor sex education by our churches, it is
>>important. <<
>
>
> But if the church in question is the FLDS, they're not going to teach those
> things.
Expecting your Church to teach you about sex, is like expecting a
termite to host an Orkin convention.....
WM
>
> Amy
Just Wondering
> Where some children have been raped, the state can --- and in fact is obligated --- to remove all children
> from the abusive situation.
>
The state does have a right to remove a child from an abusive situation.
I question whether it as a DUTY, and ask for references in Texas law
imposing such a duty. But when there are dozens of families making
their own separate homes on a ranch, and a state gets an unconfirmed
report of one 16 year old young lady having been abused, and doesn't
even know where that lady lives, the state would have the right to look
for that girl, and if they find her, possibly remove her from the home
she lives in, and possibly other girls in the same home who are old
enough to be at risk of being raped. But where does the state get the
right, from such a report, to remove a two year old boy from his mother
and a home the state knows could not possibly be the same home where the
complaining lady resides? Where does the state get the right, from such
a report, to detain a legally married couple in custody, and separate
the wife from her husband, just because they are both seventeen, as has
been reported?
And since when is a pregnancy proof of rape? From all reports, the
surrounding area is predominantly Baptist. How many 16 and 17 year old
Baptist girls in the surrounding area are pregnant, or are no longer
virgins? I'll bet there are more of them than there were on the FLDS
Ranch. Isn't that proof they were raped too? What do the Baptists do
to prevent it? I'll bet not much. So why didn't the state sweep in and
remove all Baptist children in the area from THEIR homes, so they could
isolate them and interrogate them and try to get evidence against THEIR
parents?
If as you say the state is obligated to remove all children from an
abusive situation, why doesn't the state remove all children from the
homes of people who smoke? After all, those parents are systematically
abusing their children by knowingly exposing them to carcinogens in
their own home, and the children are unable to escape. Why doesn't the
state remove young teens from parents who let them drink beer? After
all, underage drinking is illegal, precisely because it creates a
dangerous situation. What about letting your daughter date? Don't
people know that date rape occurs, and that the only sure way to prevent
date rape is to prevent dating? Why doesn't the state remove all
children from divorcing parents? After all, they all suffer or are at
significant risk of suffering severe emotional distress because of the
divorce. When a highway patrolman pulls a minivan over and discovers it
has children not wearing seat belts, why doesn't he call Child
Protective Services to put the kids in foster care? After all, the
mother has created an abusive situation by exposing the kids to a risk
of physical injury if she is in an accident, and if she did it that time
she probably makes a habit of putting her children at needless risk by
driving them around unbuckled. What about letting your child be
seriously overweight, which puts them at high risk of developing
life-threatening diabetes, or physically idle, or filling them with junk
food, all of which create all kinds of health problems? What about
removing children from homes where their children teach racism, or
religious bigotry? Isn't it abusive to fill a child's mind with such
rot? I could go on, but the point is, Texas, indeed most of us,
tolerate kids in abusive situations all the time. From all reports I've
seen, FLDS parents DO protect their kids from all these abusive
situations. The FLDS WERE singled out because of their religion, and
Texas is being hypocritical to claim otherwise.
Just Wondering
> In our last episode, <pan.2008.04...@users.easynews.com>, the
> lovely and talented Charlie Wilkes broadcast on alt.true-crime:
>
>
>
>
>> I agree FLDS should not be allowed to operate outside the law just
>> because they are a religious colony with unusual beliefs and customs.
>> But I wonder if the police are doing more harm than good because of how
>> they have handled their enforcement operation. A better approach might
>> have been to leave the colony intact (except for anyone who wanted to
>> leave) while investigating systematically and putting evidence in front
>> of a grand jury.
>
> of sexual abuse of children.
>
Please quote the Texas law that eliminates that option.
Just Wondering
> "Lars Eighner" <use...@larseighner.com> wrote in message
> news:slrng0gi69....@debranded.larseighner.com...
> seems like a *good* choice to me.
Where is the evidence that any toddlers, or preteens, or boys, were
raped or were in imminent danger of being raped? For that matter, where
is the evidence that ANY child Texas removed from his or her parents had
been raped?
And don't cite pregnant seventeen year olds. 16 and 17 year olds, even
15 and sometimes 14 under Texas law are/were capable of consenting.
Pregnancy is evidence of sex. It is not evidence of nonconsensual sex.
I'm not saying there was no rape, I don't know. But where's the evidence?
Just Wondering
>
> ""john p"" <john....@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:48183a0a-c824-4653...@b64g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> I met with a libertarian friend today and asked his opinion about this
>> whole mess, and he shared the common sense view that when kids are
>> getting raped the authorities do need to step in. I'm only hearing
>> mormons and perverts condemning Texas for removing the kids. If
>> adults want to live in a polygamist relationship, I don't care, but
>> what is happening in the mormon texas cult is sickening.
>
> on the boards, internet and blogs right now - posting on behalf
> of the pedophiles.
And here it thought the FLDS were secluded, sequestered, and isolated.
IF that was actually true, they wouldn't have the first idea how to blog.
tiny dancer
"Just Wondering" <fmh...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:tOadnXZ6-4QBe5XV...@comcast.com...
The age of consent in Texas is 17 {Texas Penal Code Section 21.11
Merlin
> tiny dancer wrote:
> > "Lars Eighner" <use...@larseighner.com> wrote in message
> >news:slrng0gi69....@debranded.larseighner.com...
Lars Eighner
lovely and talented Just Wondering broadcast on alt.politics:
> And here it thought the FLDS were secluded, sequestered, and isolated.
> IF that was actually true, they wouldn't have the first idea how to blog.
It's pretty clear you are a Latter Day Shorteyes, so you know very well,
they aren't Amish.
--
Lars Eighner <http://larseighner.com/> use...@larseighner.com
Countdown: 276 days to go.
Lars Eighner
<e-6dndLxKLjBeJXV...@comcast.com>,
> Lars Eighner wrote:
>> Where some children have been raped, the state can --- and in fact is obligated --- to remove all children
>> from the abusive situation.
>>
> The state does have a right to remove a child from an abusive situation.
> I question whether it as a DUTY, and ask for references in Texas law
> imposing such a duty.
Texas Family Code Section 261.301 --- notice the word 'shall,' not 'may.'
> But when there are dozens of families making their own separate homes on a
> ranch,
It is not at all clear that any group on the ranch constitutes a family
according to the Texas family code.
> and a state gets an unconfirmed report of one 16 year old young lady
> having been abused, and doesn't even know where that lady lives, the state
> would have the right to look for that girl, and if they find her, possibly
> remove her from the home she lives in, and possibly other girls in the
> same home who are old enough to be at risk of being raped. But where does
> the state get the right, from such a report, to remove a two year old boy
> from his mother and a home the state knows could not possibly be the same
> home where the complaining lady resides?
It is well established in law that investigators are not required to ignore
evidence of a crime in plain sight even if it is not related to the subject
of their investigation. It is also well tested that all children be removed
from a situation in which only some children are being abused. Moreover,
polygamy is a felony in Texas, and children can be removed from a situation
in which they are being trained to be felons --- whether that felony is bank
robbery, picking pockets, or polygamy.
> Where does the state get the right, from such a report, to detain a
> legally married couple in custody, and separate the wife from her husband,
> just because they are both seventeen, as has been reported?
Legally married? Really?
> And since when is a pregnancy proof of rape? From all reports, the
> surrounding area is predominantly Baptist. How many 16 and 17 year old
> Baptist girls in the surrounding area are pregnant, or are no longer
> virgins?
A 16-year-old girl could be legally married in Texas. A preganant
16-year-old might be the victim of rape or not. A 14-year-old cannot be
legally married in Texas.
> I'll bet there are more of them than there were on the FLDS Ranch. Isn't
> that proof they were raped too? What do the Baptists do to prevent it?
> I'll bet not much. So why didn't the state sweep in and remove all
> Baptist children in the area from THEIR homes, so they could isolate them
> and interrogate them and try to get evidence against THEIR parents?
Well, in fact, CPS investigates more than 10,000 cases a year. Most of
those investigations involve people who live in ordinary houses, children
who know who their parents are, and parents who can document the birth and
ages of their children. It doesn't make for such dramatic news stories,
but the fact is, Baptist families do get investigate and sometimes their
children are removed.
> If as you say the state is obligated to remove all children from an
> abusive situation, why doesn't the state remove all children from the
> homes of people who smoke?
Grounds for this are not written in the Family Code ... yet.
Come on, you could not be more obviously a flack for the Latter Day
Shorteyes if you wrote your stuff on gold plates.
Wouldn't you be happier in Iran where polygamy and forced child marriages
are legal?
> After all, those parents are systematically abusing their children by
> knowingly exposing them to carcinogens in their own home, and the children
> are unable to escape. Why doesn't the state remove young teens from
> parents who let them drink beer?
Texas law specifically provides that parents may provide alcoholic beverages
to their own children.
> After all, underage drinking is illegal, precisely because it creates a
> dangerous situation. What about letting your daughter date? Don't people
> know that date rape occurs, and that the only sure way to prevent date
> rape is to prevent dating?
But in fact, dating does not cause rape. Girls get raped who have never
dated. So there is no connection between dating and rape.
> Why doesn't the state remove all children from divorcing parents? After
> all, they all suffer or are at significant risk of suffering severe
> emotional distress because of the divorce. When a highway patrolman pulls
> a minivan over and discovers it has children not wearing seat belts, why
> doesn't he call Child Protective Services to put the kids in foster care?
Actually, it has happened.
> After all, the mother has created an abusive situation by exposing the
> kids to a risk of physical injury if she is in an accident, and if she did
> it that time she probably makes a habit of putting her children at
> needless risk by driving them around unbuckled. What about letting your
> child be seriously overweight, which puts them at high risk of developing
> life-threatening diabetes, or physically idle, or filling them with junk
> food, all of which create all kinds of health problems?
Children have been removed under such circumstances.
> What about removing children from homes where their children teach racism,
> or religious bigotry? Isn't it abusive to fill a child's mind with such
> rot? I could go on, but the point is, Texas, indeed most of us, tolerate
> kids in abusive situations all the time. From all reports I've seen, FLDS
> parents DO protect their kids from all these abusive situations.
But doesn't protect a 14-year-old girl from being raped by a 50-year-old
man, and in fact even glorifies it with a bed for that purpose in their
temple. And doesn't protect boys from being raised to be felons.
You point at everyone else, but you cannot argue away the basic fact that
Latter Days Shorteyes were invented to be a religious cover for pedophilia.
> The FLDS WERE singled out because of their religion, and Texas is being
> hypocritical to claim otherwise.
They can *believe* in raping little girls as much as they please. But when
they *do* it, they deserve to be met by the full force and majesty of the
law.
Merlin
> Where is the evidence that any toddlers,
who are the parents that is the question, is the parent of the toddler
14? or 15?
that is the questions being asked, yet none of the mothers are
identifying their children and no one seems to be giving their real
names.
> or preteens,
there appears to be 20 cases so far of underage motherhood.
these will be investigated.
> or boys, were
> raped
the boys are sent away, thrown out, as useless as they compete with
the older men for the girls. this is emotional abuse not just
physical.
> or were in imminent danger of being raped?
that is not the only abuse we are talking about, there may be a built
in cultural preference for young girls in the group that make young
boys worthless in that community. mental cruelty can be tremendous in
any family.
> For that matter,
it is important.
several of the girls say they know the girl in question that placed
the call. no one is talking past that according to testamony at the
trial today.
> where
> is the evidence that ANY child Texas removed from his or her parents had
> been raped?
what are you calling rape? when a child is invovled it is always
rape, you can't have consent for sex with a child. a child cannot
legally get married either. they finally fixed the law in missouri?
where anyone could mary anyone of any age except homosexuals.
> And don't cite pregnant seventeen year olds.
you do the math. a 17 year old could have been 16 when inpregnanted.
you can't be pro teen pregnancy.
> 16 and 17 year olds,
we aren't, we are talking about 20 girls we know of today that were
underage and are have given multiple births or are pregnant at the
moment.
let the truth come out, don't prejudge this situation. it is important
to help the children, it may be too late for their parents who have
been caught up in this world for so long they don't know anything
else.
even
> 15 and sometimes 14 under Texas law are/were capable of consenting.
it isn't concent in merlin's book it is forced.
the icon of a 15 year old is rebellion, and you say there was none?
> Pregnancy is evidence of sex.
yes,
> It is not evidence of nonconsensual sex.
you can't have consensual sex with a minor, even when the parent gives
you permission.
> I'm not saying there was no rape,
then stop there.
> I don't know. But where's the evidence?
let it come out. let the children tell their stories, they may speak
more freely without their parent watching.
we have to protect children. that is why we need sex education in
churches. to teach people how to object to what is happening to
them. and even when one church has such sex defense classes, the word
will get around to other churches. teach your children, teach your
girls, teach your men and women how to help each other, how to spot
sexual abuse and what to do.
show children it is not hopeless, that message will get around, no
media needed. where is the sexual education in these churches?
and why did these guys move their business to texas from utah?
in love,
merlin
Merlin
wrote:
> "Just Wondering" <fmh...@comcast.net> wrote in message
>
> news:tOadnXZ6-4QBe5XV...@comcast.com...
>
>
>
> > tiny dancer wrote:
> >> "Lars Eighner" <use...@larseighner.com> wrote in message
> >>news:slrng0gi69....@debranded.larseighner.com...
> >>> lovely and talented Charlie Wilkes broadcast on alt.true-crime:
>
> >>>> Interesting comments from both of you.
> >>>> I agree FLDS should not be allowed to operate outside the law just
> >>>> because they are a religious colony with unusual beliefs and customs.
> >>>> But I wonder if the police are doing more harm than good because of how
> >>>> they have handled their enforcement operation. A better approach might
> >>>> have been to leave the colony intact (except for anyone who wanted to
> >>>> leave) while investigating systematically and putting evidence in front
> >>>> of a grand jury.
> >>> The law does not provide that kind of option where there is clear
> >>> evidence
> >>> of sexual abuse of children.
>
> >> Leaving the children in the environment where they are being raped hardly
> >> seems like a *good* choice to me.
>
> > Where is the evidence that any toddlers, or preteens, or boys, were raped
> > or were in imminent danger of being raped? For that matter, where is the
> > evidence that ANY child Texas removed from his or her parents had been
> > raped?
> > And don't cite pregnant seventeen year olds. 16 and 17 year olds, even 15
> > and sometimes 14 under Texas law are/were capable of consenting. Pregnancy
> > is evidence of sex. It is not evidence of nonconsensual sex. I'm not
> > saying there was no rape, I don't know. But where's the evidence?
>
> The age of consent in Texas is 17 {Texas Penal Code Section 21.11
thank you for posting this.
children don't give permission to adults for sex.
"john p"
> ""john p"" <john.ph...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
>
> > Utah mormons have mixed feelings about FLDS. They can't hate them too
> > much because FLDS are practicing pure mormonism. But many of them
> > don't like to be reminded of their perverted beginnings.
>
> Perverted? Polygamy is perverted? Interesting. Throughout the Bible it
> was practiced, even in the time of Christ. Maybe I missed him condemning it?
> Polygamy is still practiced in many places today. Most of Islam still
> practices polygamy. So they ALL are PERVERTS John?
>
> Polygamy is something I could never accept for myself, it runs against
> the grain of MY personal beliefs. But then so do all sorts of things of
> various religions. I try to let the next guy believe as he or she wants. I
> also don't break out in a sweat when a gay guy enters the room I am in.
> That's THEIR choice. So long as it doesn't hurt anyone. I just believe in
> freedom of religion, even when I don't like it. Even Wicca or Satanism.
What are you-- a member of NAMBLA or mormonism? Child rape is sick
and so are you for defending a perverted institution. I don't care
what two consenting adults do--just don't hurt people, especially kids.
"john p"
Some people were just passing through so they weren't really bred
there;)
Just Wondering
> In our last episode,
> <e-6dndLxKLjBeJXV...@comcast.com>,
> the lovely and talented Just Wondering
> broadcast on alt.true-crime:
>
>> Lars Eighner wrote:
>>> Where some children have been raped, the state can --- and in fact is obligated --- to remove all children
>>> from the abusive situation.
>>>
>
>> The state does have a right to remove a child from an abusive situation.
>> I question whether it as a DUTY, and ask for references in Texas law
>> imposing such a duty.
>
> Texas Family Code Section 261.301 --- notice the word 'shall,' not 'may.'
>
The statute says "shall investigate," NOT "shall remove". I haven't
read anyone claiming Texas shouldn't have investigated. It's what Texas
did in the course of the investigation that is troubling.
>> But when there are dozens of families making their own separate homes on a
>> ranch,
>
> It is not at all clear that any group on the ranch constitutes a family
> according to the Texas family code.
Oh, I think a mother raising her own children in their own residence
qualifies as a family.
>
>> and a state gets an unconfirmed report of one 16 year old young lady
>> having been abused, and doesn't even know where that lady lives, the state
>> would have the right to look for that girl, and if they find her, possibly
>> remove her from the home she lives in, and possibly other girls in the
>> same home who are old enough to be at risk of being raped. But where does
>> the state get the right, from such a report, to remove a two year old boy
>> from his mother and a home the state knows could not possibly be the same
>> home where the complaining lady resides?
>
> It is well established in law that investigators are not required to ignore
> evidence of a crime in plain sight even if it is not related to the subject
> of their investigation. It is also well tested that all children be removed
> from a situation in which only some children are being abused. Moreover,
> polygamy is a felony in Texas, and children can be removed from a situation
> in which they are being trained to be felons --- whether that felony is bank
> robbery, picking pockets, or polygamy.
>
>> Where does the state get the right, from such a report, to detain a
>> legally married couple in custody, and separate the wife from her husband,
>> just because they are both seventeen, as has been reported?
>
> Legally married? Really?
Well, I wasn't at the ceremony, so I don't know for a fact. Same as
you, I'm only commenting on what was reported.
>> And since when is a pregnancy proof of rape? From all reports, the
>> surrounding area is predominantly Baptist. How many 16 and 17 year old
>> Baptist girls in the surrounding area are pregnant, or are no longer
>> virgins?
>
> A 16-year-old girl could be legally married in Texas. A preganant
> 16-year-old might be the victim of rape or not. A 14-year-old cannot be
> legally married in Texas.
14 year olds could up until a couple of years ago when Texas amended its
statute raising the age to 16.
>
>> I'll bet there are more of them than there were on the FLDS Ranch. Isn't
>> that proof they were raped too? What do the Baptists do to prevent it?
>> I'll bet not much. So why didn't the state sweep in and remove all
>> Baptist children in the area from THEIR homes, so they could isolate them
>> and interrogate them and try to get evidence against THEIR parents?
>
> Well, in fact, CPS investigates more than 10,000 cases a year. Most of
> those investigations involve people who live in ordinary houses,
From published photos, the houses these kids were taken from looked
ordinary to me (apart from looking better than the average house)
> children who know who their parents are,
That comes from reports of two and three year olds being asked their
mother's name, and answering "Mommy." You can't seriously believe a
child raised by his mother from birth and living in his mother's home
for ten years doesn't know who his mother is.
> and parents who can document the birth and ages of their children.
The only report I've actually heard on that subject was one of a mother
who, being denied access to her children because she couldn't prove they
were hers, went home and got their birth certificates. When she showed
them to the CPS worker, she was told she could have forged them.
> It doesn't make for such dramatic news stories,
> but the fact is, Baptist families do get investigate and sometimes their
> children are removed.
But why aren't all the kids on a city block removed, if the kid next
door was removed?
>> If as you say the state is obligated to remove all children from an
>> abusive situation, why doesn't the state remove all children from the
>> homes of people who smoke?
>
> Grounds for this are not written in the Family Code ... yet.
It is so. It's abuse.
Texas Code § 261.001. DEFINITIONS. In this chapter:
1) "Abuse" includes the following acts or omissions by a person:
A) mental or emotional injury to a child that results in an observable
and material impairment in the child's growth, development, or
psychological functioning;
(B) causing or permitting the child to be in a situation in which the
child sustains a mental or emotional injury that results in an
observable and material impairment in the child's growth, development,
or psychological functioning;
C) physical injury that results in substantial harm to the child, or
the genuine threat of substantial harm from physical injury to the
child, including an injury that is at variance with the history or
explanation given and excluding an accident or reasonable discipline by
a parent, guardian, or managing or possessory conservator that does not
expose the child to a substantial risk of harm;
(D) failure to make a reasonable effort to prevent an action by another
person that results in physical injury that results in substantial harm
to the child ...
That's the same definition being used to justify removal of the FLDS
children. Inhaling smoke causes physical inkury that results in the
genuine threat of substantial harm to the child. Why isn't forcing a
child to inhale known carcinogens punished as abuse?
>
>> After all, those parents are systematically abusing their children by
>> knowingly exposing them to carcinogens in their own home, and the children
>> are unable to escape. Why doesn't the state remove young teens from
>> parents who let them drink beer?
>
> Texas law specifically provides that parents may provide alcoholic beverages
> to their own children.
So Texas has actually codified at least one form of abuse as acceptable.
That's hypocrisy.
>> After all, underage drinking is illegal, precisely because it creates a
>> dangerous situation. What about letting your daughter date? Don't people
>> know that date rape occurs, and that the only sure way to prevent date
>> rape is to prevent dating?
>
> But in fact, dating does not cause rape. Girls get raped who have never
> dated. So there is no connection between dating and rape.
But there is a direct causal connection between dating and date rape.
>> Why doesn't the state remove all children from divorcing parents? After
>> all, they all suffer or are at significant risk of suffering severe
>> emotional distress because of the divorce. When a highway patrolman pulls
>> a minivan over and discovers it has children not wearing seat belts, why
>> doesn't he call Child Protective Services to put the kids in foster care?
>
> Actually, it has happened.
>
In Texas? Give an example or two. And why doesn't it happen in Texas
as a matter of course?
>> After all, the mother has created an abusive situation by exposing the
>> kids to a risk of physical injury if she is in an accident, and if she did
>> it that time she probably makes a habit of putting her children at
>> needless risk by driving them around unbuckled. What about letting your
>> child be seriously overweight, which puts them at high risk of developing
>> life-threatening diabetes, or physically idle, or filling them with junk
>> food, all of which create all kinds of health problems?
>
> Children have been removed under such circumstances.
How often? More likely, the mother will get a warning, not even a ticket.
>> What about removing children from homes where their children teach racism,
>> or religious bigotry? Isn't it abusive to fill a child's mind with such
>> rot? I could go on, but the point is, Texas, indeed most of us, tolerate
>> kids in abusive situations all the time. From all reports I've seen, FLDS
>> parents DO protect their kids from all these abusive situations.
>
> But doesn't protect a 14-year-old girl from being raped by a 50-year-old
> man, and in fact even glorifies it with a bed for that purpose in their
> temple.
Texas police found a bed. There's no evidence it was ever used as you
describe.
> And doesn't protect boys from being raised to be felons.
Define felon. Do you have any actual evidence (as opposed to
unsubstantiated gossip) that every boy taken into custody was being
raised to fit your definition?
>> The FLDS WERE singled out because of their religion, and Texas is being
>> hypocritical to claim otherwise.
>
The only real evidence I've heard is that the FLDS practice arranged
marriages. Many cultures do the same thing. If the people being
married are OK with an arranged marriage, who are you to judge it wrong?
If a person isn't given a choice, that would be wrong. It may happen,
but that doesn't appear to be FLDS doctrine, but rather a departure from
their doctrine. And it certainly doesn't warrant taking five kids ages
2-10 from their mother.
Merlin
this is about a grown organization of people systematically abusing
children
under the disquise of religion.
this is about who is responsibile for the children and what actually
happened.
there is no such thang as straight protected religious pedophilia.
as we witness the pope feeling shame.
there is no such thang as a child giving permission to an adult.
as we listen for the pope to indicate he gets what the real problems
are in his group.
there is no such thang as a parent giving their child over to another
adult for use.....
we have learned that over 20 children are pregnant before they were
17, the legal age for consent.
get over the religious excuse this is systematic abuse of little girls
no matter if they think they were legally married.
this isn't about religious freedom.
they had all the freedom of this world, and what did they do with it?
that will be in the discovery.
it sure don't sound pretty what is comming from the court room today.
and when you have a group where all adults are invovled in the abuse
of even one child, or even knew of any abuse and did nothing, even
when their children are only a month old, it makes it hard to see
those adults as caring enough for their own children with any more
enlightenment that they held for the older children in their group.
why do so many not see the harm possible to the children?
in love,
merlin
GeekBoy
"Deadrat" <a...@b.com> wrote in message
news:4R2Oj.4647$iK6....@nlpi069.nbdc.sbc.com...
>H Good <hg...@oopercodec.ro> wrote in
> news:Xns9A84109...@chinanet.cn.hk:
>
>> On 18 Apr 2008, Lars Eighner <use...@larseighner.com> posted some
>> news:slrng0gi08....@debranded.larseighner.com:
>>
>>> In our last episode, <Zt-dnZ87o-9vrZXV...@comcast.com>,
>>> the lovely and talented timeOday broadcast on alt.true-crime:
>>>
>>>> Calling it a "case" is a stretch. What they have done is take
>>>> hundreds of children from their parents because they belonged to the
>>>> same church as a parent who who was accused anonymously by somebody
>>>> who now will not come forward.
>>>
>>> Bullshit. There was clear evidence in the number of pregnant girls
>>> that crimes had been committed.
>>
>> That's not evidence of anything other than they had sex and didn't use
>> protection.
>
> Children under 16 may not marry in Texas; Children between the ages of 16
> and 18 may marry with parental consent, but this consent must be given
> before the marriage license is issued via forms available from the county
> clerk. Sex with a non-spouse under 17 is called indeceny with a child and
> is a felony unless the child's partner is no more than 3 years older (and
> of the opposite sex).
>
------------------------------------------------
§ 2.103. COURT ORDER FOR UNDERAGE APPLICANT. (a) A
minor may petition the court in the minor's own name for an order
granting permission to marry. In a suit under this section, the
trial judge may advance the suit if the best interest of the
applicant would be served by an early hearing.
(b) The petition must be filed in the county where a parent
resides if a court has not awarded another person the right to
consent to marriage for the minor. If a court has awarded another
person the right to consent to marriage for the minor, the petition
must be filed in the county where that person resides. If no parent
or person who has the court-ordered right to consent to marriage for
the minor resides in this state, the petition must be filed in the
county where the minor lives.
(c) The petition must include:
(1) a statement of the reasons the minor desires to
marry;
(2) a statement of whether each parent is living or is
dead;
(3) the name and residence address of each living
parent; and
(4) a statement of whether a court has awarded to a
person other than a parent of the minor the right to consent to
marriage for the minor.
(d) Process shall be served as in other civil cases on each
living parent of the minor or on a person who has the court-ordered
right to consent to marriage for the minor, as
applicable. Citation may be given by publication as in other civil
cases, except that notice shall be published one time only.
(e) The court shall appoint an amicus attorney or an
attorney ad litem to represent the minor in the proceeding. The
court shall specify a fee to be paid by the minor for the services of
the amicus attorney or attorney ad litem. The fee shall be
collected in the same manner as other costs of the proceeding.
(f) If after a hearing the court, sitting without a jury,
believes marriage to be in the best interest of the minor, the
court, by order, shall grant the minor permission to marry.
Charlie Wilkes
> "Lars Eighner" <use...@larseighner.com> wrote in message
> news:slrng0gi69....@debranded.larseighner.com...
>> In our last episode, <pan.2008.04...@users.easynews.com>, the
>> lovely and talented Charlie Wilkes broadcast on alt.true-crime:
>>
>>
>>
>>> Interesting comments from both of you.
>>
>>> I agree FLDS should not be allowed to operate outside the law just
>>> because they are a religious colony with unusual beliefs and customs.
>>> But I wonder if the police are doing more harm than good because of
>>> how they have handled their enforcement operation. A better approach
>>> might have been to leave the colony intact (except for anyone who
>>> wanted to leave) while investigating systematically and putting
>>> evidence in front of a grand jury.
>>
>> The law does not provide that kind of option where there is clear
>> evidence of sexual abuse of children.
>
>
> Leaving the children in the environment where they are being raped
> hardly seems like a *good* choice to me. Especially wiith the people
> who have indoctrinated them that this is *right* and *just* behavior.
> The poor kids have already been fucked up enough as it is.
I wonder, though, if the enforcement operation isn't compounding their
woes.
Charlie
Charlie Wilkes
> "Charlie Wilkes" <charlie...@users.easynews.com> wrote in message
> news:pan.2008.04...@users.easynews.com...
>>
>> I agree FLDS should not be allowed to operate outside the law just
>> because they are a religious colony with unusual beliefs and customs.
>> But I wonder if the police are doing more harm than good because of how
>> they have handled their enforcement operation. A better approach might
>> have been to leave the colony intact (except for anyone who wanted to
>> leave) while investigating systematically and putting evidence in front
>> of a grand jury.
>>
>> Charlie
>
> Uh, that's been tried several times in other states.
I wasn't aware of that. Can you point me to an example?
Charlie
Diana
"Poe" <hau...@terrible-thought.com> wrote in message
news:66rhsfF...@mid.individual.net...
> Charlie Wilkes wrote:
>> On Thu, 17 Apr 2008 20:56:03 -0400, Poe wrote:
>>
>>> Diana wrote:
>>>> "Kris Baker" <kris....@prodigy.net> wrote in message
>>>> news:wTQNj.4580$iK6....@nlpi069.nbdc.sbc.com...
>>>>> "Diana" <dian...@noyoudont.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:8rQNj.21338$El4.17853@trnddc05...
>>>>>> "Bert Hyman" <be...@iphouse.com> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:Xns9A8367CFB3A...@127.0.0.1...
>>>>>>> gmail98...@yahoo.com (Angelocracy.com) wrote in
>>>>>>> news:db08b8ab-
>> def7-4256-99c...@u69g2000hse.googlegroups.com:
>>>>>>>> after there safety?
>>>>>>>>
>>> either. But wouldn't you agree it is harmful to force underage girls
>>> into sex with men nowhere near their age, and into a lifetime of child
>>> rearing, instead of making an informed choice to get into all that?
>>>
>>> number of ways - foster homes often are not wonderful, the children will
>>> be unprepared for the outside world, some may have suffered some abuse
>>> (I read there was the equivalent of water-boarding to stop babies from
>>> crying). So I *really* feel for the children. But FLDS sounds as if it
>>> was, and has been for some time, breaking US and state laws WRT child
>>> sexual abuse, other physical abuse, psychological abuse, and neglect.
>>>
>>> Hopefully you'll consider my comments in the spirit I mean them. I am
>>> not against alternative lifestyles provided those involved want to be
>>> there, and know their options.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> because they are a religious colony with unusual beliefs and customs.
>> But I wonder if the police are doing more harm than good because of how
>> they have handled their enforcement operation. A better approach might
>> have been to leave the colony intact (except for anyone who wanted to
>> leave) while investigating systematically and putting evidence in front
>> of a grand jury.
>>
>> Charlie
>>
>
>
> deliberately with forethought. FLDS seems to have been on LE radar for
> quite a while, so LE and CPS should have considered the possibility that
> at some point there could be a large-scale removal of children. And these
> children in particular have been so sheltered and led to fear so much, and
> that wreaking havoc on their lives would be psychologically and
> emotionally damaging to these kids even more so than kids accustomed to us
> evil outsiders.
>
> I am really not sure exactly what could have been done here, but it is a
> cannot go forward with happy, fruitful lives the way many would like
> because of the damage done to them from the time they were born thru to
> be provided, but due to this mass processing it may end up being
> insufficient. I hope, but can't see, a good ending to this.
There is no good ending possible here. Even if the state of Texas admitted
its gigantic blunder and put all the women back in the compound with their
children, incredible damage has been done. Do you think that these kids have
a chance?
No. No matter what happens now, they don't.
Then of course there is this: how much credence can we put in any complaints
the women make about what happened in the compound, given what they stand to
gain--and lose? Even if what they tell the authorities is solid gold truth,
the fact remains that if they do not claim to have been mistreated, they may
well never see their children again. If they do claim this, they might.
What would you do in their places?
Therefore, it seems to me that, like the information one gets from torture,
it can't really be trusted; the method of obtaining it has irreversibly
tainted it. As to the information gained from the questioning of the
children....come on. Haven't we learned by now how unreliable that is,
especially when the interogations are managed by people who have
agendas--and a point to prove?
You are absolutely right about this situation being a 'giant cluster.'
Insert any perjoritive you want after 'cluster.'
Diana
" krp" <krp2...@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:DtZNj.26635$6w3.12294@trnddc07...> news:66q9uoF...@mid.individual.net...
>
>> I respect your LDS affiliation, and honestly don't care about polygamy,
>> either. But wouldn't you agree it is harmful to force underage girls into
>> sex with men nowhere near their age, and into a lifetime of child
>> rearing, instead of making an informed choice to get into all that?
>
>
> KNOW the ultimate truth here. To an absolute certainty. Some of us don't.
> Given history we wait a bit to see before we "string em up!" Personally I
> find polygamy a repulsive idea FOR ME. I'm a one woman kind of guy. How
> compound POSITIVE that all kinds of kids were being raped?
>
> Lake City) and work for a radio station there. So all of this LDS shit is
> nothing new to me. I was exposed to LOTS of disgruntled EX-Mormons and
> their stories of the HORRORS of Mormonism. I was handed a booklet by a
> former Mormon (or she claimed to be) by the name of Tanner. She related an
> elaborate story of rapes and sexual goings on in the Salt Lake Mormon
> Temple. In it she claimed that the "Elders" were setting up a session for
> a GANG RAPE of her, and how she had to LEAP to safety of the great salt
> lake from the 3rd floor window. At first I was shocked. Until I realized
> that it would have been one HELL of a leap since the salt lake is
> concluded it WAS bullshit when I learned that the salt lake at that point
> was little more than ankle deep and a leap EVEN IF you could have made it
> would most likely have been fatal.
>
> of bullshit to say about our church. MAYBE he says it because he was an
> adulterer and has a guilty conscience. I listened to all sorts of former
> Mormons tell me stories for our news. 99% of it turned out to be bullshit.
>
> some truth to it. In any closed group some crap is bound to happen. I
> kids is MORE prevalent out here in the "world" than in a closed highly
> their vaginas sewn shut at birth! Sorry Diana. (I was single when I lived
> in Utah. I did NOT find LDS gals at all interesting.) Oh they were pretty
> enough and nice enough.
I understand. They were pretty enough, and nice enough, but they had this
thing about waiting until they were married before they had sex, right?
Amazing idea, that. ;-)
I will admit that I had never heard that the Tanners were spreading the
'jump out of the Temple into the Great Salt Lake" story. I had heard it, of
course--but I had seen it in terms of a nineteenth century tale involving
tunnels under the Atlantic to Great Britain, virgin daughters of
nobility....and getting picked up out of the GSL by a passing schooner
headed for the Pacific. It's almost nice to know that the story still has
'wings,' so to speak. ;-)
In general, though, I believe you are right.
Diana
> krp wrote:
>> "Poe" <hau...@terrible-thought.com> wrote in message
>> news:66q9uoF...@mid.individual.net...
>>
>>> I respect your LDS affiliation, and honestly don't care about polygamy,
>>> either. But wouldn't you agree it is harmful to force underage girls
>>> into sex with men nowhere near their age, and into a lifetime of child
>>> rearing, instead of making an informed choice to get into all that?
>>
>>
>> Sure it is! IF that is what was REALLY happening. Only YOU guys seem
>> to KNOW the ultimate truth here. To an absolute certainty. Some of us
>> don't. Given history we wait a bit to see before we "string em up!"
>> Personally I find polygamy a repulsive idea FOR ME. I'm a one woman kind
>> of guy. How many ATC members were 10,000% SURE the Duke players HORRIBLY
>> raped poor Crystal Mangum? REPEATEDLY and without any compassion or
>> mercy? How many folks here were cheering on the tanks with flame throwers
>> at the Waco compound POSITIVE that all kinds of kids were being raped?
>>
>
> question, I guess) was valid and a minor was at risk. It warranted a look,
> especially considering her complaint was consistent with stories told by
> women who have left FLDS, and with general hearsay about antics that go on
> there (idk the source of of it all).
>
> And sure, false reports of bad things are made all the time, and some who
> hear them get way too riled up before the facts all come out, but that
> doesn't mean a complaint should never be investigated.
Investigated? Sure.
Wholesale raids involving the separation of literally hundreds of children
from their mothers? I don't think so.
>
Diana
> In our last episode, <78SNj.88$fC5.82@trnddc02>, the lovely and talented
> Diana broadcast on alt.true-crime:
>
>
>> "Kris Baker" <kris....@prodigy.net> wrote in message
>> news:wTQNj.4580$iK6....@nlpi069.nbdc.sbc.com...
>>> "Diana" <dian...@noyoudont.com> wrote in message
>>> news:8rQNj.21338$El4.17853@trnddc05...
>>>>
>>>> "Bert Hyman" <be...@iphouse.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:Xns9A8367CFB3A...@127.0.0.1...
>>>>> gmail98...@yahoo.com (Angelocracy.com) wrote in
>>>>>
>>>>>> But what about the young women and girls in this nation? Who looks
>>>>>> after there safety?
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Apparently lots of people. Otherwise this incident wouldn't be in the
>>>>> news, would it?
>>>>
>>>> You mean like the McMartin pre-school trials, and the Salem witch
>>>> trials?
>>>
>>> Do you seriously believe there's a comparison? Why?
>>> Are you LDS/FLDS?
>>>
>>> Had you even heard anything of these real issues, prior to April 4th?
>
>> You know I"m LDS.
>
>
>> That's not exactly a secret. However, this has nothing to
>> do with my religion. It has EVERYTHING to do with the way this raid was
>> handled, and how the after math of it is being handled. I did not, and do
>> not, agree with the FLDS lifestyle, or polygamy.
>
> The
> supposedly "good" Mormons have been covering up for these guys for years.
> The Mormon church from day one was a fraud to perpetuate pedophilia, and
> you
> know it. "Gold plates" indeed!
>
>> I agree even less with authorities entering that compound on the pretense
>> of a fraudulent phone call,
>
> the
> complaint is made by an *anonymous* caller.
That wasn't an 'anonymous' caller. That was a fraudulent call, and should
have been seen as such from the beginning. It was obvious---and obviously
cooked up for the purpose.
<snip to end>
Diana
"Kickin' Ass and Takin' Names" <PopUl...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:8144fcff-3023-4d96...@59g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
On Apr 17, 8:42 pm, "Diana" <diana...@noyoudont.com> wrote:
> "Kris Baker" <kris.ba...@prodigy.net> wrote in message
>
> news:wTQNj.4580$iK6....@nlpi069.nbdc.sbc.com...
>
>
>
>
>
> > "Diana" <diana...@noyoudont.com> wrote in message
> >news:8rQNj.21338$El4.17853@trnddc05...
>
> >> "Bert Hyman" <b...@iphouse.com> wrote in message
> >>news:Xns9A8367CFB3A...@127.0.0.1...
> >>> gmail987654...@yahoo.com (Angelocracy.com) wrote in
> >>>news:db08b8ab-def7-4256...@u69g2000hse.googlegroups.com:
>
> >>>> But what about the young women and girls in this nation? Who looks
> >>>> after there safety?
>
> >>> Apparently lots of people. Otherwise this incident wouldn't be in the
> >>> news, would it?
>
> >> You mean like the McMartin pre-school trials, and the Salem witch
> >> trials?
>
> > Do you seriously believe there's a comparison? Why?
> > Are you LDS/FLDS?
>
> > Had you even heard anything of these real issues, prior to April 4th?
>
> do with my religion. It has EVERYTHING to do with the way this raid was
> handled, and how the after math of it is being handled. I did not, and do
> not, agree with the FLDS lifestyle, or polygamy.
>
> of
> a fraudulent phone call,
Any proof that the phone call was fraudulent?
****I dunno...perhaps the fact that there was no such woman who fit the
profile of 'Sarah,' and that the man claimed to have been her
"husband"/rapist/father of her child could not possibly have been so MIGHT
be a clue.******
<snip to end>
Lars Eighner
Diana broadcast on alt.true-crime:
> There is no good ending possible here. Even if the state of Texas admitted
> its gigantic blunder and put all the women back in the compound with their
> children, incredible damage has been done. Do you think that these kids
> have a chance?
Ha, ha! There is going to be paternity AND maternity DNA testing on the
children. That will put an end to your lies, and all the gold plates from
heaven and magic underwear will not keep the truth from coming out.
> What would you do in their places?
How about not raping kids and not turn kids over for raping? Didn't think
about that, did you? All the Latter Day Shorteyes had to do was not rape
kids. But they just couldn't control themselves.
> Therefore, it seems to me that, like the information one gets from torture,
> it can't really be trusted; the method of obtaining it has irreversibly
> tainted it. As to the information gained from the questioning of the
> children....come on. Haven't we learned by now how unreliable that is,
> especially when the interogations are managed by people who have
> agendas--and a point to prove?
And how will you argue away the DNA tests? The judge has ordered the
tests. The world will know the truth, and your racist, pedophile cult will
be exposed once and for all. Think about that the next time you want to
invent a religion.
Diana
>
> "Kickin' Ass and Takin' Names" <PopUl...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:8144fcff-3023-4d96...@59g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> >>>> after there safety?
>>
>> >>> Apparently lots of people. Otherwise this incident wouldn't be in the
>> >>> news, would it?
>>
>> >> You mean like the McMartin pre-school trials, and the Salem witch
>> >> trials?
>>
>> > Do you seriously believe there's a comparison? Why?
>> > Are you LDS/FLDS?
>>
>> > Had you even heard anything of these real issues, prior to April 4th?
>>
>> You know I"m LDS. That's not exactly a secret. However, this has nothing
>> to
>> do with my religion. It has EVERYTHING to do with the way this raid was
>> handled, and how the after math of it is being handled. I did not, and do
>> not, agree with the FLDS lifestyle, or polygamy.
>>
>> I agree even less with authorities entering that compound on the pretense
>> of
>> a fraudulent phone call,
>
> < Any proof that the phone call was fraudulent?
>
Lessee--how about the fact that the man who was named as the father of the
caller's child could not possibly have been so, since he hadn't been in the
state in decades? Or how about this: no girl fit the profile of the caller?
Diana
> In our last episode, <6pdOj.354$Zk5.81@trnddc05>, the lovely and talented
> Diana broadcast on alt.true-crime:
>
>> There is no good ending possible here. Even if the state of Texas
>> admitted
>> its gigantic blunder and put all the women back in the compound with
>> their
>> children, incredible damage has been done. Do you think that these kids
>> have a chance?
>
> Ha, ha! There is going to be paternity AND maternity DNA testing on the
> children. That will put an end to your lies, and all the gold plates from
> heaven and magic underwear will not keep the truth from coming out.
You really are an idiot. It doesn't matter what the DNA says. The state of
Texas told the women that they weren't going to see their children again.
Period.
>
>> What would you do in their places?
>
> How about not raping kids and not turn kids over for raping? Didn't think
> about that, did you? All the Latter Day Shorteyes had to do was not rape
> kids. But they just couldn't control themselves.
>
>> Therefore, it seems to me that, like the information one gets from
>> torture,
>> it can't really be trusted; the method of obtaining it has irreversibly
>> tainted it. As to the information gained from the questioning of the
>> children....come on. Haven't we learned by now how unreliable that is,
>> especially when the interogations are managed by people who have
>> agendas--and a point to prove?
>
> And how will you argue away the DNA tests? The judge has ordered the
> tests. The world will know the truth, and your racist, pedophile cult
> will
> be exposed once and for all. Think about that the next time you want to
> invent a religion.
>
What's with the DNA testing, you blithering idiot? Why even bother...so that
the state can know WHICH parent they are denying which kid to?
Diana
"Merlin" <merli...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:7297a742-163a-4509...@24g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
dear, " krp"
>
> > I respect your LDS affiliation, and honestly don't care about polygamy,
> > either. But wouldn't you agree it is harmful to force underage girls
> > into
> > sex with men nowhere near their age, and into a lifetime of child
> > rearing,
> > instead of making an informed choice to get into all that?
>
> Sure it is! IF that is what was REALLY happening.
so investigate? find out. right? plunge in separate the rumors from
truth.
> Only YOU guys seem to
> KNOW the ultimate truth here.
why not check out the problem........ find out what really happened,
having read many of the posts in this thread, there doesn't seem to be
a lack of curiosity about the truth.
> To an absolute certainty.
yes, let us find if there were cots in the temple.
yes, let us find out if there were unaged preganant girls?
yes, let us find out if there was any married against their will?
yes, let us find out what happend if there were any lost boys?
this can all be sorted out.
> Some of us don't.
you do want the truth to come out right?
> Given history we wait a bit to see before we "string em up!"
local gossip is one thang.
local animosity for any group is possible.
yet no one is being strung up.
*********nobody is being killed, no--but that wasn't the fault of the
invading authorities, who went in with bullet proof vests and very heavily
armed. What IS happening is that hundreds of children are being kept in
extremely substandard care, examined, interogated and abused in ways that
they did NOT find when they were with their mothers.******
questions are being ask.
are the questions fair? are the questions being answered?
merlin believes the truth can win out.
*********merlin is overly optimistic. The 'truth' very seldom wins in these
situations.*******
> Personally I
> find polygamy a repulsive idea FOR ME.
merlin doesn't understand the need, not into harems.
tho living with a larger family can have it's rewards.
> I'm a one woman kind of guy. How many
> ATC members were 10,000% SURE the Duke players HORRIBLY raped poor Crystal
> Mangum? REPEATEDLY and without any compassion or mercy?
good question.
tho this was the matter of a dishonest DA pushing this event.
is there one person doing that this time.
********what's happening here is a mob mentality.******
> How many folks here
> were cheering on the tanks with flame throwers at the Waco compound
> POSITIVE
> that all kinds of kids were being raped?
what was that situation, how did it start?
how could we have done that one better?
didn't know it was sexaul charges that time too.
thought there were some specific incidence.
> I had a great opportunity as a CATHOLIC to live in Mormon land (Salt
> Lake City) and work for a radio station there. So all of this LDS shit is
> nothing new to me. I was exposed to LOTS of disgruntled EX-Mormons and
> their
> stories of the HORRORS of Mormonism. I was handed a booklet by a former
> Mormon (or she claimed to be) by the name of Tanner. She related an
> elaborate story of rapes and sexual goings on in the Salt Lake Mormon
> Temple. In it she claimed that the "Elders" were setting up a session for
> a
> GANG RAPE of her, and how she had to LEAP to safety of the great salt lake
> from the 3rd floor window. At first I was shocked. Until I realized that
> it
> would have been one HELL of a leap since the salt lake is something like
> 35
> MILES to the northwest of the temple. Then I started to wonder when I
> noticed that the stained glass windows didn't open. I concluded it WAS
> bullshit when I learned that the salt lake at that point was little more
> than ankle deep and a leap EVEN IF you could have made it would most
> likely
> have been fatal.
yet none of this went to the courts.
no one was called for help?
we need to teach other how to get help.
> You know there are former Catholics (Phil Donahue) that have all sorts
> of bullshit to say about our church. MAYBE he says it because he was an
> adulterer and has a guilty conscience. I listened to all sorts of former
> Mormons tell me stories for our news. 99% of it turned out to be bullshit.
we saw the church accuse homosexauls.
now we see the pope accusing pedophiles.
that seems an improvement in those cases toward honesty at least.
yet no one that secretly managed the scandals in the church
have been taken to task.
the old boys network that runs the church is still in power
after spending years shuffling difficult cases around
their communities and the country.
when some justice is meated out at the top, and sense that the church
understand this problem might arise.
******There is a problem. How can you expect the CoJCoLDS to issue 'justice'
against a group of people over which it has no control? You may as well
blame the Mormons for what the Methodists do. The most we can do is
excommunicate them, y'know---that is, if they were ever members. As it
happens, polygamists get excommunicated very, very quickly. But then, who
wants to know actual facts here? *******
<snip to end>
Diana
>>
>> "Kris Baker" <kris....@prodigy.net> wrote in message
>> news:wTQNj.4580$iK6....@nlpi069.nbdc.sbc.com...
>>> "Diana" <dian...@noyoudont.com> wrote in message
>>> news:8rQNj.21338$El4.17853@trnddc05...
>>>>
>>>> "Bert Hyman" <be...@iphouse.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:Xns9A8367CFB3A...@127.0.0.1...
>>>>> gmail98...@yahoo.com (Angelocracy.com) wrote in
>>>>> news:db08b8ab-def7-4256...@u69g2000hse.googlegroups.com:
>>>>>
>>>>>> But what about the young women and girls in this nation? Who looks
>>>>>> after there safety?
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Apparently lots of people. Otherwise this incident wouldn't be in the
>>>>> news, would it?
>>>>
>>>> You mean like the McMartin pre-school trials, and the Salem witch
>>>> trials?
>>>
>>> Do you seriously believe there's a comparison? Why?
>>> Are you LDS/FLDS?
>>>
>>> Had you even heard anything of these real issues, prior to April 4th?
>>
>> You know I"m LDS. That's not exactly a secret. However, this has nothing
>> to do with my religion. It has EVERYTHING to do with the way this raid
>> was handled, and how the after math of it is being handled. I did not,
>> and do not, agree with the FLDS lifestyle, or polygamy.
>>
>> I agree even less with authorities entering that compound on the pretense
>> to be questioned by police while they left their children in
>> another--upon the promise of the authorities that they would be reunited
>> with their kids after the questioning--only to be told that the only way
>> ANY of them would ever see their children again is if they asked to be
>> sent to a domestic violence shelter and made a complaint against the FLDS
>> compound.
>>
>> Oh, I love this; everyone here is so aghast at the lifestyles of these
>> FLDS folks. No polygamy, nope.
>>
>> So they go in and destroy the lives of 400 children, removing them from
>> their mothers, and lying to everybody concerned, putting those kids in a
>> foster care system that is utterly incapable of dealing with them.
>>
>> They are 'saved' from the horrors of a lifestyle you don't like, and
>> their lives are now absolutely certain to be ruined, but that's just
>> fine, isn't it? No polygamy. Never mind that their security is destroyed
>> and their families have been broken, they will never have to wear long
>> blue dresses with puffy sleeves.
>>
>> This entire thing is making me gag.
>
> but as someone I long ago killfiled.
Evidently not, since you are reading me. I haven't changed my address or
anything else for years. However, you asked, I answered; I've been around
ARM for a decade and a half, and if you have been around more than a week or
two, you know that I am a TBM.
>
> You anti-government folks are the types that keep these PEDOPHILE-
> dream religions going.
(snort) 'anti-government?' Actually, I'm pro-constitution.
>
> I don't think anyone here gives a crap about polygamy itself.
Don't be any dumber than you have to be. Of course it is about polygamy.
> We do, however, care about the rape of young girls....and the
> grooming of their sexual lives.
Yeah, right.
>
> I'm surprised that an LDS person would support such pedophilia.
I think you need to look up the definition of pedophilia. I don't support
the forced marriage of anybody, of any age, no matter how many spouses are
involved. However, it has only been VERY recently that girls under the age
of 18 have been considered far too young to marry. Indeed, in a bunch of
states, the age at which people can marry is considerably younger than that;
14 or so, with the consent of parents.
Not to mention that it seems to be a truism amongst the shouters for birth
control and sex education that every teenager over the age of twelve is
'doing it' anyway. Isn't that why condoms in the schools, sex education and
abortion without a parent's knowledge, (never mind consent...) is so
important to the very hypocrites who are all upset about the FLDS compound?
There is NO evidence of pedophilia or sexual child abuse. None. That I don't
like the idea of very young women being forced to marry older men who
already have spouses is irrelevent. THEY are OK with it; the state of Texas
had to MANUFACTURE a 'call for help' in order to raid the place. What does
that tell you?
Never mind. It is quite obvious that you, and those like you, are quite
willing to bust the constitution in the chops if doing so will 'get' the
folks YOU don't like. It's only when doing so inconveniences YOU that you
yell to high heaven.
The problem, however, is that if we only uphold constitutional civil rights
for those with whom we agree, then we have abrogated those rights for
everybody.
Diana
""john p"" <john....@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:48183a0a-c824-4653...@b64g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
>> "Diana" <diana...@noyoudont.com> wrote in message
>>
>> news:78SNj.88$fC5.82@trnddc02...
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > "Kris Baker" <kris.ba...@prodigy.net> wrote in message
>> >news:wTQNj.4580$iK6....@nlpi069.nbdc.sbc.com...
>> >> "Diana" <diana...@noyoudont.com> wrote in message
>> >>news:8rQNj.21338$El4.17853@trnddc05...
>>
>> >>> "Bert Hyman" <b...@iphouse.com> wrote in message
>> >>>news:Xns9A8367CFB3A...@127.0.0.1...
>> >>>> gmail987654...@yahoo.com (Angelocracy.com) wrote in
>> dream religions going.
>>
>>
>> grooming of their sexual lives.
>>
>>
>
> I met with a libertarian friend today and asked his opinion about this
> whole mess, and he shared the common sense view that when kids are
> getting raped the authorities do need to step in. I'm only hearing
> mormons and perverts condemning Texas for removing the kids. If
> adults want to live in a polygamist relationship, I don't care, but
> what is happening in the mormon texas cult is sickening.
That's because you aren't paying attention.
"john p"
> "Kris Baker" <kris.ba...@prodigy.net> wrote in message
>
> news:nSTNj.4596$iK6....@nlpi069.nbdc.sbc.com...
>
>
>
>
>
> > "Diana" <diana...@noyoudont.com> wrote in message
> >news:78SNj.88$fC5.82@trnddc02...
>
> >> "Kris Baker" <kris.ba...@prodigy.net> wrote in message
> >>news:wTQNj.4580$iK6....@nlpi069.nbdc.sbc.com...
> >>> "Diana" <diana...@noyoudont.com> wrote in message
> >>>news:8rQNj.21338$El4.17853@trnddc05...
>
> >>>> "Bert Hyman" <b...@iphouse.com> wrote in message
> >>>>news:Xns9A8367CFB3A...@127.0.0.1...
> >>>>> gmail987654...@yahoo.com (Angelocracy.com) wrote in
How arrogant for you to cross post into other peoples groups and
expect everyone to know where you are posting from and your life
history. Perhaps you should thank kris for not assuming the only
people who support the mormon polygamists are mormons.
Colonel Jake
"john p" <john....@gmail.com>
<5a4560de-9ce9-4656...@y18g2000pre.googlegroups.com>
:Diana <dian...@noyoudont.com>
:>Kris Baker <kris....@prodigy.net>
:>:Diana <dian...@noyoudont.com>
:>:>Kris Baker <kris....@prodigy.net>
:>:>:Diana <dian...@noyoudont.com>
:>:>:>Bert Hyman <be...@iphouse.com>
:>:>:>:Angelocracy.com <gmail98...@yahoo.com>
:>:>:>:>
:>:>:>:>But what about the young women and girls in this
<froup alt.usenet.kooks added>
And all this time we thought?,
""john p" had some kind of froup etiquette?!?!?!,...., but
by his poast, we all know he hace none!!!,...., for instance
(and this is for all Newsfroups), the first newsfroup in teh
Newsfroups: field, will determine what newsfroup you're from,
but since "john p" is a complete newsfroup idiot!!!,...., we
couldn't expect him to know that!!!,...., so instead?!?!?!,...,
"john p" just makes a total and complete FUCKING ASSHoLE oUT oF
HIMSELF!!! (doesn't he, he sure FUCKING DoES)..."
"VideO Madness" "Pink Floyd - The Trial!!!..."
(by the AUK's der'Office of Illucidus Maximus)
COlOnel Jake Enterprises®
Presents
http://www.coloneljake.com/videos/0105/
--
High Speed Internet Connection
http://www.coloneljake.com/pages/page200/
Dialup Internet Connection
http://www.coloneljake.com/pages/page201/
The Order of Lenin for Usefulness
http://www.coloneljake.com/pages/page017/
¸,.,¸
:And then some...
`^'^´
AUK's der'Office of Illucidus Maximus
http://www.coloneljake.com/pages/page014/
Alt.Usenet.KoOks der'Official KoOkshite
http://club127.net/auk/
Lars Eighner
Diana broadcast on alt.true-crime:
> What's with the DNA testing, you blithering idiot? Why even bother...so that
> the state can know WHICH parent they are denying which kid to?
You know and I know that it will prove that old men raped and impregnated
minor girls, thereby proving that Mormonism is nothing more or less than a
pedophile ring. Every inch of land, every stick and nail on it will be
forfeit as the fruits of a criminal enterprize, and this blot on humanity
will be gone forever.
krp
news:66rj8iF...@mid.individual.net...
>> Sure it is! IF that is what was REALLY happening. Only YOU guys seem
>> to KNOW the ultimate truth here. To an absolute certainty. Some of us
>> don't. Given history we wait a bit to see before we "string em up!"
>> Personally I find polygamy a repulsive idea FOR ME. I'm a one woman kind
>> of guy. How many ATC members were 10,000% SURE the Duke players HORRIBLY
>> raped poor Crystal Mangum? REPEATEDLY and without any compassion or
>> mercy? How many folks here were cheering on the tanks with flame throwers
>> at the Waco compound POSITIVE that all kinds of kids were being raped?
> I think that there was a reasonable suspicion that the call (now in
> question, I guess) was valid and a minor was at risk. It warranted a look,
> especially considering her complaint was consistent with stories told by
> women who have left FLDS, and with general hearsay about antics that go on
> there (idk the source of of it all).
Really? With today's revelations that they KNEW who it was? A Colorado
woman with a LONG LONG LONG LONG LONG history of making FALSE claims.Too bad
you will NEVER see this on CNN or MSNBC. Seems like it was the "EXCUSE"
social workers had been looking for to go after the FLDS folks.
http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2008Apr19/0,4670,PolygamistRetreat,00.html
"Texas Rangers also are investigating a Colorado woman as a "person of
interest" related to calls made to a family crisis center. Police arrested
Rozita Swinton, 33, on Wednesday in Colorado Springs on a misdemeanor charge
of false reporting to authorities for a call she made in late February.
Authorities did not say whether a call by Swinton might be the one that
triggered the raid.
But officers who searched her home found items suggesting a possible
connection between Swinton and calls regarding a compound owned by FLDS in
Arizona and one in Eldorado, the Texas Department of Public Safety said late
Friday. The items weren't identified.
"The information, evidence and a statement obtained from Swinton by the
Texas Rangers while they were in Colorado will be forwarded to state and
federal prosecutors for their review and determination whether Swinton will
be charged with a criminal offense," the statement said.
Swinton's whereabouts were unknown, and it wasn't known whether she had an
attorney. A phone number for her in Colorado Springs was disconnected.
Authorities in Colorado confirmed Swinton has a history of making false
reports."
http://www.freerepublic.com/tag/*/index
Poe
> In our last episode, <KXeOj.80$mw4.75@trnddc04>, the lovely and talented
> Diana broadcast on alt.true-crime:
>
>> What's with the DNA testing, you blithering idiot? Why even bother...so that
>> the state can know WHICH parent they are denying which kid to?
>
> You know and I know that it will prove that old men raped and impregnated
> minor girls,
I betcha a few of the men will flee the compound before their DNA is
obtained, tested, and the mother and children identified.
> enterprize,
LOL "enerprize", good one!
krp
>>>> Interesting comments from both of you.
>>>
>>>> I agree FLDS should not be allowed to operate outside the law just
>>>> because they are a religious colony with unusual beliefs and customs.
>>>> But I wonder if the police are doing more harm than good because of how
>>>> they have handled their enforcement operation. A better approach might
>>>> have been to leave the colony intact (except for anyone who wanted to
>>>> leave) while investigating systematically and putting evidence in front
>>>> of a grand jury.
>>>
>>> evidence
>>> of sexual abuse of children.
>
>
>
> Some of the girls are pregnant. That's pretty clear.
And their AGE is proven? And WHO knocked them up is proven????
krp
"tiny dancer" <tinyda...@nospamhotmail.com> wrote in message
news:DL2Oj.25132$Q52....@bignews9.bellsouth.net...
>>>>
>>>>> Interesting comments from both of you.
>>>>
>>>>> I agree FLDS should not be allowed to operate outside the law just
>>>>> because they are a religious colony with unusual beliefs and customs.
>>>>> But I wonder if the police are doing more harm than good because of
>>>>> how
>>>>> they have handled their enforcement operation. A better approach
>>>>> might
>>>>> have been to leave the colony intact (except for anyone who wanted to
>>>>> leave) while investigating systematically and putting evidence in
>>>>> front
>>>>> of a grand jury.
>>>>
>>>> The law does not provide that kind of option where there is clear
>>>> evidence
>>>> of sexual abuse of children.
>>
>>
>>> Again Lars you are so POSITIVE............
>>
>> Some of the girls are pregnant. That's pretty clear.
>
>
> chillun is bad.
Yes Tiny we all KNOW that women NEVER LIE! That in ALL of recorded history
NO woman has even told the smallest FIB!
krp
>>>>
>>>>> Interesting comments from both of you.
>>>>
>>>>> I agree FLDS should not be allowed to operate outside the law just
>>>>> because they are a religious colony with unusual beliefs and customs.
>>>>> But I wonder if the police are doing more harm than good because of
>>>>> how
>>>>> they have handled their enforcement operation. A better approach
>>>>> might
>>>>> have been to leave the colony intact (except for anyone who wanted to
>>>>> leave) while investigating systematically and putting evidence in
>>>>> front
>>>>> of a grand jury.
>>>>
>>>> The law does not provide that kind of option where there is clear
>>>> evidence
>>>> of sexual abuse of children.
>>>
>>>
>>> hardly
>>> seems like a *good* choice to me.
>
>> Tiny!
>
>
> No little girl involved.
But Tiny was 22,444% positive they were GUILTY AS hell and needed to be
CASTRATED for the evil things they did to that poor innocent woman.
Poe
So claims made by women should never be trusted or investigated? Men
tell lies, too. Should all claims made by men be ignored as as well?
False claims like this are despicable and I have no idea WHY anyone
would to that, there are *so* many ways to get attention - many of them
constructive and/or profitable.
CPS had to investigate the claim once it was made, though.
krp
"Merlin" <merli...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:7297a742-163a-4509...@24g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
dear, " krp"
> > I respect your LDS affiliation, and honestly don't care about polygamy,
> > either. But wouldn't you agree it is harmful to force underage girls
> > into
> > sex with men nowhere near their age, and into a lifetime of child
> > rearing,
> > instead of making an informed choice to get into all that?
>
> Sure it is! IF that is what was REALLY happening.
< so investigate? find out. right? plunge in separate the rumors from
truth.
And this means round the kids and women up, herd them like Cattle with
prods and hail they off fvor HOURS of grillign until they "admit the truth!"
> Only YOU guys seem to KNOW the ultimate truth here.
< why not check out the problem........ find out what really happened,
having read many of the posts in this thread, there doesn't seem to be
< a lack of curiosity about the truth.
And WHAT is this "TRUTH" that YOU know for 100% positive?
> To an absolute certainty.
> yes, let us find if there were cots in the temple.
And of course IF there were that can ONLY mean thnat a bunch of fukking
was going on right? LOTS opf pedophilia! LOTS AND LOTS of it.
OR - could acot be tghere for ANY other reason? It PROVES beyond all debate
that RAPOE was going on, right? NO QUESTION!
< yes, let us find out if there were unaged preganant girls?
Say ever seen any underaged pregnant Lutheran girls dipshit? I did. I
even saw a couple Pentacostal girls who were knocked up. Does that mean we
should send out the national guard to arrest the pastor and herd all the
women and children into buses and grill them for days on end without sleep?
< yes, let us find out if there was any married against their will?
Did any say they were? Could those questions have been asked withour
rounding them up like cattle? Say should we send SWAT into AROUND UP all the
boys at the Catholic sc hools tyo ASK them if the presists have been
diddling them?????????????????
< yes, let us find out what happend if there were any lost boys? this can
all be sorted out.
Hmmm how do we do that?
krp
> this isn't about religion.
> this is about a grown organization of people systematically abusing
> children
> under the disquise of religion.
> this is about who is responsibile for the children and what actually
> happened.
And you KNOW this to a 1,000% rock solid certainty HOW?
krp
>> > Utah mormons have mixed feelings about FLDS. They can't hate them too
>> > much because FLDS are practicing pure mormonism. But many of them
>> > don't like to be reminded of their perverted beginnings.
>>
>> Perverted? Polygamy is perverted? Interesting. Throughout the Bible
>> it
>> was practiced, even in the time of Christ. Maybe I missed him condemning
>> it?
>> Polygamy is still practiced in many places today. Most of Islam still
>> practices polygamy. So they ALL are PERVERTS John?
>> Polygamy is something I could never accept for myself, it runs
>> against
>> the grain of MY personal beliefs. But then so do all sorts of things of
>> various religions. I try to let the next guy believe as he or she wants.
>> I
>> also don't break out in a sweat when a gay guy enters the room I am in.
>> That's THEIR choice. So long as it doesn't hurt anyone. I just believe in
>> freedom of religion, even when I don't like it. Even Wicca or Satanism.
> What are you-- a member of NAMBLA or mormonism? Child rape is sick
> and so are you for defending a perverted institution. I don't care
> what two consenting adults do--just don't hurt people, especially kids.
Are you fukking WHACKED or what? Where ion your TOTALLY WARPED MIND did
I say I was defending pedophilia? WHERE did I mention kids?
I was addressing "POLYGAMY" you dunce! No weenie I am NOT a member of
NAMBLA - (The North American Man BOY Love Association) I am EXTREMELY
HETERO. I also said I have ONE WIFE you twerp and CATHOLIC. Take some
remedial English lessons QUICK!
krp
The idea of chastity isn't amazing at all. Many Cathoilic girls once
believed in it too. As a single guy, just out of a divorce (praise the lord)
and FREE AT LAST - THANK GOD ALMIGHTY FREE AT LAST - I wasn't much
interested in proving that kind of stuff. My comment was actuall a left
handed compliment, that Mormon women squeaked as they walked.
> I will admit that I had never heard that the Tanners were spreading the
> 'jump out of the Temple into the Great Salt Lake" story. I had heard it,
> of course--but I had seen it in terms of a nineteenth century tale
> involving tunnels under the Atlantic to Great Britain, virgin daughters of
> nobility....and getting picked up out of the GSL by a passing schooner
> headed for the Pacific. It's almost nice to know that the story still has
> 'wings,' so to speak. ;-)
On no there was a little pamphlet or tract being passed out. The strange
sexual rituals in the temple. Now I had no firsthand knowledge of any such
things going on, just that I found the story, ON ITS FACE to be more than a
little absurd.
krp
Well beyond THAT - we now KNOW that Texas social workers KNEW the REAL
identity of the Colorado woman making the FALSE claims and they also KNEW
she had a LONG history of false reports!
timeOday
> The state is on well-tested and firm ground. Where some children have been
> raped, the state can --- and in fact is obligated --- to remove all children
> from the abusive situation.
"The" abusive situation, that is the false assumption. You can't punish
a whole town full of people, take away all their kids, and then make
them prove they deserve to be parents, because of accusations against
individuals among them.
The idea that everybody who belongs to a particular church constitutes a
"household" under the law is utter nonsense. This is pure collective
punishment.
Lars Eighner
lovely and talented timeOday broadcast on alt.true-crime:
Well, then, it should be a simple matter for them to come up with the birth
and marriage records to show that the compound is not one household. Oh,
wait, those records would reveal that they were raping children! Too bad.
timeOday
> Well, then, it should be a simple matter for them to come up with the birth
> and marriage records to show that the compound is not one household.
It's a large number of families, living in different homes. There is no
sense in which it is one household.
> Oh,
> wait, those records would reveal that they were raping children!
"They" who? If the police can build a case against somebody, they
should arrest and charge them. I'm sure that will happen in some cases,
deservedly so. But rounding up a whole community and demanding them to
each prove their innocence is not how it works. Splitting up families
and sending them off to foster care because you think they don't mingle
with society enough and have weird hairstyles is not how it works.
Diana
> In our last episode, <KXeOj.80$mw4.75@trnddc04>, the lovely and talented
> Diana broadcast on alt.true-crime:
>
>> What's with the DNA testing, you blithering idiot? Why even bother...so
>> that
>> the state can know WHICH parent they are denying which kid to?
>
> You know and I know that it will prove that old men raped and impregnated
> minor girls, thereby proving that Mormonism is nothing more or less than a
> pedophile ring.
Uhm....You DO realize that there are considerably more than 12 million
Mormons on the planet, and only 50,000 of them (if that many) are
polygamists---not to mention that the compound in question has only about
600 people in it, most of them children?
Not to mention that the largest sect of Mormons, (the one that HAS that 12
million people in it) does not practice polygamy and excommunicates--VERY
quickly--anybody who does? Not that it will matter you your disordered
brain, but I just thought I'd mention it.