SuziQ
Former Member
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2007
- Messages
- 39,600
- Reaction score
- 52,000
ITA, it's shocking to think that, that much mind control can be accomplished without the use of drugs. Absolutely scary.
Warren Jeffs FLDS compound in Texas surrounded by police #4
- Thread starter Blue_Dolphin308
- Start date
- Status
ITA, it's shocking to think that, that much mind control can be accomplished without the use of drugs. Absolutely scary.
Have you heard Michael Jackson talk about children?
Nope, unfortunately. still getting this instead:
Bomb explodes in northern Spain 0:46
A bomb exploded outside the ruling Socialist Party offices early Sunday after ETA separatists phoned in a warning.
ETA bomb hits northern Spain
It's possible this is happening because my IP is from Europe and i'm failing to get USA CNN.
Leila
Active Member
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2005
- Messages
- 12,378
- Reaction score
- 28
Sadly, this is what i constantly find with any link given to a CNN video. it's never what people think it is. your link takes me here:
Bomb explodes in northern Spain 0:45
A bomb exploded outside the ruling Socialist Party offices early Sunday after ETA separatists phoned in a warning.
World News - International Headlines, Stories and Video from CNN.com
i have no idea just why i can not get to the videos others see.
Oh dear..........I went to Nancy Grace's website and she had a number of videos from her programs this past week. I viewed the video at the link I gave you, and it started out with the women at the YFZ ranch and then clips of Marilyn's tour, and then went into the Pope's visit. So, I was hopeful that you'd at least get to see some of Marilyn's tour.
golfmom
Former Member
That was YOUR assertion, not hers.
She simply was highlighting the fact that speaking historically people had much shorter life spans. You took her question out of context. She was implying that you had to have children younger then because life spans were shorter. Also, it could be inferred that our life spans are longer now, in part, because we aren't baring children while we're still children ourselves.
You took a posters question out of context and misconstrued her point.
SuziQ
Former Member
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2007
- Messages
- 39,600
- Reaction score
- 52,000
Floh here is the emailed link. If it doesn't work then there is a problem somewhere. I really want you to see the unibrow lady!
http://www.cnn.com/video/?/video/us/2008/04/16/lkl.flds.polygamy.cnn
http://www.cnn.com/video/?/video/us/2008/04/16/lkl.flds.polygamy.cnn
barb0301
New Member
- Joined
- Jan 21, 2007
- Messages
- 1,065
- Reaction score
- 33
The majority of people who have it intertwined are those that agree with the FLDS.
In my mind, it is purely a matter of child abuse. Although I find it absolutely disgusting that they hide behind "religion" to justify what they are doing, and then on top of it, try to pick and choose the laws that they should follow, religion is not an issue here for me. IT IS ALL ABOUT THE CHILDREN.
I am sooooo tired of hearing them scream about their rights being violated. Not a single day of their lives have they allowed their children any rights.
And just FYI, I don't mind discussing the "rights" issue with you or anyone else here on the boards. What I do mind is when the FLDS get on TV and whine that the government is "breaking the law", and then refuse to answer questions such as "how many wives does your husband have", "have you seen any underage girls get married", etc.
Leila
Active Member
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2005
- Messages
- 12,378
- Reaction score
- 28
Suzy..............that's the same link I sent to Floh. Evidently, anything that's CNN changes because of her being located in Europe or her browser.
I don't think the video tour was featured on any other channels - I think it was a CNN exclusive. I remember Larry King, Nancy Grace, and Anderson Cooper all showing the tour, or parts of the tour.
Thank you! that worked! :woohoo:
so i take it unibrow lady is Marilyn, yes?
lying through her teeth, she is. IMO.
(as a shallow aside, she's a good good looking gal if it weren't for that extraordinary unibrow.)
There was clearly something different about the last link Suzy sent me and it did work.
the vaguries of the internet, eh?
WOW about all those chairs in a semi circle around the big ol' armchair. it's clear they will be women sitting round the 'patriarch' in that room. :sick:
barb0301
New Member
- Joined
- Jan 21, 2007
- Messages
- 1,065
- Reaction score
- 33
We don't know yet that they did/didn't do anything wrong to the 2 year old. What we DO know is that they lived in a community where there were underaged girls pregnant, so there was "someone" in the community raping children, and as adults, they failed to report it as child abuse. That alone, in TX, is a crime....failing to report suspected child abuse.
We also don't know, until a full investigation is done, and results released, what the following testimony from Thursday's hearing meant, as none of the attorneys questioned it:
"Can you identify any households in which a child was caused serious injury or death? the attorney says.
Yes, the CPS supervisor says.
Four children's attorneys and one parent's attorney want to speak from the auditorium, a court official says.
This is a 14-day hearing, the judge said. And questions should relate to its purpose.
An attorney rises up to protest the judge is shutting down questions. The judge notes that is not what she said.
In the auditorium, a child's attorney tries to zero in on what age the CPS supervisor considers a child "indoctrinated" in a religion that she feels encourages sex abuse.
"It's just like any other investigation," she says. "When you find one child that's a victim in a home, you have concerns for all of them, and the ranch is considered one large home."
http://gosanangelo.com/news/2008/apr/17/live-from-the-courthouse-updates-ON-FLDS-CUSTODY/
http://i178.photobucket.com/albums/w271/txrhb1/biker_mama.jpg
Glow
Active Member
I am glad that you used the word "appear". I "appear" to condone.
I think that anytime you have a very small group that feel something very strongly and along comes one person who doesn't agree it can be hard to listen to what they are really saying.
There is an equal possibility that that one poster can not be 100% clear in each and every post. I can appreciate that about myself. Just yesterday I posted a long and rambling post about CPS and a very kind poster asked me to explain myself and sure enough I was thinking in my own little head about one small aspect of this case and my post came out very garbled. Her pointing that out enabled me to correct it. So in case I have been unclear in that same sense to you I will try to say it in a way that makes it a little more clear where I stand. I appreciate you giving me that opportunity MostlyLurking.
Here is my stand.
1) I wont use inflammatory inaccurate terms to whip up another's feelings. The facts can support themselves without that. (see rant below)
2) I do not suscribe to the belief that it is ok to hurt a "few" people and tread on their rights if we can accomplish a "greater" good for the many as determined by the state.
3) I think the power of the government should be carefully watched when it comes to their "reach" into the family home.
4) I do not believe it is the course of wisdom take over anothers life when we cannot offer them anything better than what they currently have.
5) I do believe that pedophiles should not only be removed from society but should in fact be executed if it is definite that they have offended. John Couey or Father James Porter are two that would be eligible in my mind.
6) I think this case will end up going to the Supreme Court. I don't know if it will be over the 1st amendment or the IV.
7) For what its worth, I think that most people are having a hard time separating out the underage aspect of this from the polygamy part.
aforementioned rant::crazy:
I have not and will not use inflammatory phrases like "pedophile" to describe each and every man in the compound. All of us who read and post on a crime forum know what a true pedophile is. It is a man (we will say man for the purpose of simplicity here) who has a sexual interest in children who have not developed sexually. It is a pathological twist in their mental make up. They are sexually excited by a prepubescent child . The FLDS men wait until a girl menstruates and then she is spiritually "married". This seems an awful practice to me personally living in the time period I do but it isn't true pedophilia according to the medical definition. What it is could be more accurately defined as adults engaging in illegal sexual activity with minors.
But that doesn't care the same punch to say that. Its more accurate, but not as titillating. And by the way, yes, I do think there are sexual predators among the FLDS. I think Warren Jeff's is one. He is exactly where he needs to be. Hope they find a way to keep him a long time. That aside, I cant condemn every man in this sect on the basis of that. Not anymore than I can condemn the entire Catholic church on the basis of the rampant pedophilia(meeting the ACCURATE definition) that has and still does occur in their ranks.
Leila
Active Member
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2005
- Messages
- 12,378
- Reaction score
- 28
Excellent post and I absolutely agree! It's not abut polygamy and it's not about religion - it's about child abuse over a long term!
Yes & we also know that Micheal Jackson is a sex offender.
So maybe the women at the FLDS are just as guilty as he is.
Glow
Active Member
Exactly. You and I agree that is what she was implying.
My question back was this:
If that were true in this case (the age span) would these people (FLDS)still be wrong?
this isn't "apples to oranges". I asked if the same original conditions still existed, would the same reasoning still apply.
the question should be easy on the surface to answer without resorting to misnomers.
But it isn't easy at all if a person has their mind made up and doesn't want to consider the question being asked. And that too is fine. This is just a discussion board and nothing said here is going to impact the situation in Texas at all.
mostlylurking
Member
- Joined
- Apr 22, 2007
- Messages
- 413
- Reaction score
- 3
OK, Glow. If we're going by the literal definition of the words:
Pedophilia or paedophilia (Commonwealth usage) is the primary or exclusive sexual attraction of adults to prepubescent children.
Rape is a form of assault where one individual forces another to have sexual intercourse against that person’s will.
The lack of valid consent does not necessarily mean that the victim explicitly refused to give consent. Generally, consent is considered invalid if it is obtained from someone who is:
I'll give you pedophile. You give me rape.
The comparison to the Catholic Church and the horrific indiscrestions of some of it's priests is not a fair comparison to the teachings of this FLDS sect.
Pedophilia or paedophilia (Commonwealth usage) is the primary or exclusive sexual attraction of adults to prepubescent children.
Rape is a form of assault where one individual forces another to have sexual intercourse against that person’s will.
The lack of valid consent does not necessarily mean that the victim explicitly refused to give consent. Generally, consent is considered invalid if it is obtained from someone who is:
- Under any kind of duress (force, violence, blackmail, etc.)
- Judgmentally impaired or incapacitated by alcohol or drugs (legal or otherwise)
- Mentally impaired whether by illness or developmental disability
- Below the age of consent defined in that jurisdiction
I'll give you pedophile. You give me rape.
The comparison to the Catholic Church and the horrific indiscrestions of some of it's priests is not a fair comparison to the teachings of this FLDS sect.
I hope not! The women and Michael seem to have the same tone to their voice - they all sound very childlike.
OK, if you were in charge of CPS, what would you do with this situation? How would you protect the children?
Glow
Active Member
I think the best indicator of the future is the past. When situations come up today many times they have a counterpart lurking somewhere in history. As far as the American Indians. They were a fringe society that practiced polygamy. Married daughters off at puberty. Traded their females with other tribes through raids. They practiced a "strange" religion. They were very harsh and strict with their children while simultaneously not giving them an "education". They dressed in a strange way. They were resistant to coming up to speed in the obviously "superior" white mans world. And they didn't bathe enough.
And they smelled funny.
I have a question cheko~ If two gay men want to have a spiritual marriage and adopt a child is that wrong?
- Status