Comments on Pro Libertate: The Texas Child Grab: Cowpie ala Mode (Updated)

Good long post, to bad its not true, and you prove...

2008-06-14T16:02:00.000-06:00

Good long post, to bad its not true, and you proved it to me by your picture of the women waving , as you put it from the "detention" center of CPS.
That happens to be a picture of the Group of FLDS from Bountiful British Columbia.. LOL Thats their homes where they live. Not anywhere NEAR TEXAS or YFZ. Try being truthful.

Anonymous, during this whole imbroglio it has been...

2008-05-27T09:05:00.000-06:00

Anonymous, during this whole imbroglio it has been the CPS, not the FLDS, that has been inhospitable to telling the truth.

We were told that there were 31 "children" between ages 14 and 17 who either had given birth, were pregnant, or both. In fact, there were only five who met that description, and of that group three gave birth at 16. All but one of that cohort are, or will reach the age of, 18 this year.

CPS dishonestly inflated that total in the hope that it would have an impact on public opinion. That was why, inter alia, CPS refused to accept valid documentation from several "disputed minors" who were monogamous mothers of legal age.

Remember as well that the legal age to marry in Texas is 16. The blunt fact is that the CPS has no case, apart from any it manages to put together through simple extortion (i.e., forcing parents to admit to unspecified abuse as part of "Family Management" plans parents sign as a condition of getting back their kidnapped children).

I completely understand, and wholeheartedly support, the refusal of the FLDS to cooperate with a predatory, dishonest agency that oozed its way into their community through deliberate deception and the threat of lethal force.

The initial search warrant was invalid, the behavior of CPS once on FLDS property was arrogant and abusive, and no American citizen can be compelled to offer testimony against his own interests.

There are public officials involved in this mess who should not only be sued into utter penury, but spend serious time in prison. I would love to see that outcome, but I'd settle for seeing the children restored to their parents.

Penumbra,Yes those things would still be illegal, ...

2008-05-27T08:33:00.000-06:00

Penumbra,

Yes those things would still be illegal, but who would enforce the laws. If a citizen witnessed abuse who would they notify. One can say the police, but then where would the child go? Who would monitor the children once they were removed?

As for the current case according to the newspapers in DFW some of the children are pregnant with at least one or two being as young as 15. Also reportedly (again from the newspaper as I am unaware of court testimoy at this time) that several of the mothers of these children are in their late teens and early twenties, but are believed to have children that would put them being pregnant at around age 14 or 15. It is difficult to determine since the parents of these children had been refusing to give any accurate information, even names regarding the children.

Anonymous, If CPS were abolished, child abuse, ped...

2008-05-23T08:20:00.000-06:00

Anonymous,

If CPS were abolished, child abuse, pedophilia, etc. would still be illegal.

Regarding the El Dorado case, you state you believe children were abused: based on what evidence? CPS's trial by public opinion or testimony in a court of law?

I first must admit that I was mistaken about how c...

2008-05-22T16:53:00.000-06:00

I first must admit that I was mistaken about how comments on the blog are added. I apologize and I applaud Mr. Grigg for allowing all comments except profane ones to be posted. Mr. Grigg please accept my apology on that front. My comment was incorrect in that area.

I realize shortly before I wrote my response the Texas Court of Appeals rules that CPS was wrong in the mass removal. They may have stepped over the line legally. CPS may appeal the case. That remains to be seen. Even still, society should not tolerate abuse and neglect of children. Is it "belligerent wrongness" to want society to help children in need anad for others to be prepared to help them.
Am I "belligerent" and wrong to point out that adoption does in fact help millions of children have good families- certainly not everyone who has been adopted has benefited rather than allow them to remain in abusive situations? Maybe I am, then I think of my own situation and the situation of several other individuals I know who have been adopted and I can't help but think that people really believe that social workers "wreck" families.
Was the El Dorado case a mistake. I do not believe so. Maybe I am wrong but I believe that some of these children are being abused. CPS may have stepped over the line in removing all of them, and if a child was wrongfully removed from their mother and father I pray that he or she is returned immediately. Even still, that does not change the idea that CPS should not be abolished as they try to help kids who have been abused. What would we do in its place. I would honestly like your opinion on that. If we know of a pedophile, or a baby left alone by a drug addicted mother, or an abused child if CPS were abolished as at the very least the tone of the blog suggests what should society do?

anonymous,the only posts winnowed out by the propr...

2008-05-22T16:33:00.000-06:00

anonymous,the only posts winnowed out by the proprietor of this blog (Yours Truly) are spam or those that are deliberately profane.

In light of the appeals court decision today, I particularly appreciate your contribution. Please feel free to sit there and revel in your belligerent wrongness.

Wow this blog is absolutely ridiculous. Initially ...

2008-05-22T16:26:00.000-06:00

Wow this blog is absolutely ridiculous. Initially there appeared to be some good points, but boy the misinformed nature of the writer and many of the people who responded is incredible. First let's clear up a few things adoption as stated in a few posts is not "wrecking" families. The families were alreadys in some turmoil for that to happen.
I have been adopted because my parents abused me severely over the course of early life. It troubles me to hear that CPS should be abolished. It sounds exactly what pedophiles and child abusers would want to hear. I have also adopted so I admit I take that personally because I know my daughter is better without her parents one of which is in jail and one who is addicted to drugs. Will there be a void in her life regarding her bio parents- yes, but adopting her did not cause horrible damage or "wreck" her family.
Second, the idea that Texas is going to make a lot of money off of these kids is simply not true. Each child in state custody COSTS the state money. It is estimated according to the Dallas Morning News that it will cost the State 21 million for the first year with these children.
Third, being married before the age of 16 and having a baby at that age is child sexual abuse. I realize some of you want to say it is their religion, but since when was it alright for religion to sponsor child abuse. May we all be helped should pedophiles some how form their own religion.
Fourth, In contacting Arrow myself I have learned that they have not actually had any of these children placed into their care. A little research of my own which would have taken a few minutes revealed that Arrow is one of the larger foster care agencies in Texas and this fact I believe would have led the State to immediately contact them after taking the children into custody to seek out help. Admittedly Arrow's statement probably could have been better, but yes everyone shame on them for trying to begin to be prepared to take in some traumatized children. Shame on them. You are all absolutely right.
Lasly if I am not mistaken all comments must be approved by the author of the blog. Funny how a one sided argument always seems true.

Hi, Will. Your article above was read on Free Tal...

2008-05-21T21:53:00.000-06:00

Hi, Will. Your article above was read on Free Talk Live, a syndicated radio program on 30-some stations.
Listen here if you want:
MP3.

Mr Grigg - For future use, the community is Eldora...

2008-05-19T14:59:00.000-06:00

Mr Grigg - For future use, the community is Eldorado, TX....pronounced El-doe-ray- doe. Your writings are continually appreciated.

"And as previously indicated, these Constitutional...

2008-05-19T13:39:00.000-06:00

"And as previously indicated, these Constitutional legal rights aren't merely for the benefit of parents, as it's the children who suffer the most under this present system."

Herein imbedded in everyday thinking is the root of the whole problem; Constitutional legal rights. Why do I have to have such "legal" rights? How about let me regain my simple lawful self-evident rights. I write "regain" or even restore because "Constitutional legal rights" are shoved up my rear and these are simply now man made legal rights granted as if by privilege. Depending upon the interpreter of "Constitutional legal rights" and the tilt of the reading glasses on their noses so go my lawful rights turned into a scheme to support someone’s ideas, failures, dreams and schemes. Damn "Constitutional legal rights". How can Constitutional legal rights grant me what I already own? How can Constitutional legal rights make illegal what is naturally lawful?

The rights confirmed as being self-evident in the Declaration of Independence were the reasons for both founding documents. "Constitutional legal rights" are now the legal reasons to legally plunder the people and even their children are legal plunder.

In the Declaration of Independence, it makes a very good point that people have a natural and self-evident right to throw off such governments that harm the people. While I do not advocate violence, we can at least throw off the political language such as "Constitutional legal rights" which has so many different misunderstandings and instead start to talk like a free people independent of the government they create for their own equal individual benefit, goodwill and pleasure.

For the so-called "Christian" as well I hate that name too; Christian. This word as well is used to “legally” harm people. For those "Christian" cheerleaders let me know where it is in the Bible where Christians;

1) have a kingdom on earth?
2) Where does it says that the followers of Jesus are to smite or harm people who reject Jesus or His followers?
3) Where does it say that "Christians" are to judge non-believers in their sin?
4) In terms of judgment regarding Christian sin (like sleeping with your father's wife) where is judgment more than simply removing that person from their/the-Christian community?
5) And where is it written in the Bible that the Christian God signed off on the Declaration of Independence and Constitution of the uS. These political documents were created as well by atheists and agnostics; not just Christians, I think?

Here must have been the thought process of God when he endorsed this human form of government.

I imagine God thinking to Himself before His approval.

"Let see, I created a perfect environment in the Garden of Eden with just a couple of rules and they couldn't handle that. Hmm and later because my creatures couldn't remember how to treat each other or respect Me, I gave them government and the 10 Commandments and that was a complete flop. It wasn't so much a failure of My plan as it is what can be done for those that can't live in a perfect environment? My people even asked for human rulers and that too is a complete failure. In retrospect, the joke is on my creatures as they got what they asked for. What a laugh. Eventually my creatures will elect rulers Bill Clinton and G W Bush.

Oh my but this, yes these revolutionaries in the North American Continent now I think I can endorse that. Yea, I know that my other plan to use a part of Myself in the form of Jesus to restore people back to me with My kingdom to be reestablished later; and the fact that my Son died a humiliating and painful death to accomplish My plan, aw what the heck I'll just scrap that to go along with my creatures’ new plan and in spite of a history of failed human plans and government. As well, I can ignore how those self-evident rights of Life, Liberty and so on I endowed human creatures with were somehow limited to white males, but what the heck it will all work itself out. Yes, I give my blessing to this..."

As that "relationships would be great except for people" anything created by people may become politicized for unlawful gain or unlawful protection of something owned. This unlawful gain and protection will become legal. What is needed are more people with the understanding of their self-evident natural rights apart from constitutions and legalism that limit our natural self-evident rights. Whatever "Constitutional legal rights" may have meant, even just for white males and that is what I am, I care not for these limited rights anymore. Freedom is first in the mind and soul no matter the chains on the physical body.

There can be a slow political answer as there is no legal or even lawful quick answer really left us anymore. Any that think so should read former Judge Andrew Napolitano’s book Constitutional Chaos where he writes in the introduction titled "Breaking the Law" pg. ix:
"Because it breaks the law, the government is not your friend...after witnessing first-hand how the criminal justice system works to subvert and shred the Constitution. You think you have rights that are guaranteed? Well think again.
Because the government breaks the law and denies it, the governmentis not your friend."
And pg. 181. “The government is simply stretching and twisting federal law and the Constitution in whatever way it sees fit for whatever contemporary need it may have.”

Contents of Part 1: “Rights and Liberties
1. Breaking the law to enforce it
2. Attacking the Innocent
3. Creating Crime
4. Grabbing Guns, Endangering Citizens
5. Filching Property
6. Gagging Free Speech
7. Bribing Witnesses, Buying Convictions
8. Assaulting the People
Part 3 The Hard Test: The War on Terror”
10 The Justices Department Terror Tactics

It has taken a slow corruption of blood by a political process to put us in the mess we live with today. The major part of this is the language and definition of terms and words that have meaning only in our bizzaro world.

The word “freedom” today means the right of this rebellious government to legally plunder the people to fund schemes, ideas, failures, wealth and pleasures at the expense of real self-evident rights not limited to Life, Liberty. How is there any productive benefit in using the words “Constitutional rights” or “Constitutional legal rights”? When it is all said and done, won’t it be claimed this government has a “Constitutional legal right” to protect children?! Who in their right mind really wants that?!

By the way, the political start of an answer is Ron Paul. Even though he won’t be elected, he is far closer to the truth than anyone else is. Ron Paul is not the answer or savior. He is only a path to a better understanding of our individual self-evident rights and freedom.

The problem with the comment from 9:21 a.m. is tha...

2008-05-19T11:11:00.000-06:00

The problem with the comment from 9:21 a.m. is that the State of Texas claimed to have moved very quickly after the anonymous "complaint." Furthermore, the authorities claimed that they moved precisely because of the complaint.

Thus, if they actually were preparing weeks in advance for this, then they are lying when they claim they acted on the basis of the "anonymous" phone call. They cannot have it both ways.

My sense is that this entire thing was choreographed. I suspect that the authorities knew that the original call was a fraud and might even have been involved in it. They cannot have been planning the way they did, but then claim the whole thing was triggered by the call.

I wanted to say that you keep mentioning how the v...

2008-05-19T10:21:00.000-06:00

I wanted to say that you keep mentioning how the various agencies were prepared weeks in advance for an influx of children. I don't think that's as malicious as you play it out to be, as it would have been even more irresponsible to toss hundreds of children into an area that wasn't prepared to receive them. And even with the preparations, there was always a chance that the children would not have been taken anyway, however small that chance is.

Thanks so much, Thinking Mama! It turns out that y...

2008-05-19T05:56:00.000-06:00

Thanks so much, Thinking Mama! It turns out that you and I have more than a little in common, although I've got no reason to suspect that foul play was involved in my own adoption as a newborn (or in the adoptions of my four brothers and one of my sisters).

Just yesterday I spoke at some length with someone who has done a great deal of investigative work into the "Social Wrecking" industry, and she put me onto a pretty solid lead that may pay off soon. This stuff is imponderably evil.

Thanks again, and my best to your family!

Hi Will,Thank you so much for your keen observatio...

2008-05-19T05:51:00.000-06:00

Hi Will,

Thank you so much for your keen observations about this situation. And of course, the "Just for Men" reference is priceless. :)

As an adoptee who was separated from my own natural and God-given family for over 34 years, I have done much research into the $1.5 billion dollar per year U.S. adoption industry. Social wreckers separated up my family and I have since learned that they break up many families each day in the U.S. (and now, around the world). As long as mainstream media encourage adoption and call adopters "parents," these abuses will continue. There are several mothers who have lost their children to the adoption industry, not en masse as these mothers have, but one by one. I have communicated with many of these moms; as with my own natural mother, they were lied to and sometimes drugged so that their babies could be harvested and given to supposedly more deserving people, often under the guise of Christianity. Unfortunately, what is happening to mothers in Texas has been happening to mothers around the world for many years. I am thankful that now, perhaps, some people are beginning to listen to the truth about the greediness and deceitfulness of the U.S. adoption industry.

Welfare fraud is rampant among polygamist communit...

2008-05-19T05:27:00.000-06:00

Welfare fraud is rampant among polygamist communities.

Who often control local government entities such as law enforcement.

Jeffs moved people around all the time.

Mothers at YFZ could be receiving welfare benefits based out of another state and we'd never know.

Sure, you're only supposed to get certain benefits while you're a resident of that state.

But I've met people on disability receiving public benefits (SSI) who quietly expatriated to Mexico to stretch those dollars.

One thing that has not been discussed, yet I think...

2008-05-19T05:04:00.000-06:00

One thing that has not been discussed, yet I think that Will and others do understand its implications, is that what Texas (and government in general) is doing to people in what one might call a "cult" today will be done tomorrow to people from "orthodox" Christian groups.

We have "Christian" organizations like Arrow Child and Family Ministries taking part in what can only be kidnapping of children in large part because the authorities are hostile to their religious beliefs. Yet, we already know that many in the CPS Gestapo in other states (and probably Texas, too) are hostile to Christianity in general.

What is going to happen in the future when the authorities start arresting and jailing homeschooling families en masse? Who will stand up for them? Will Arrow be participating in THAT exercise, too?

I am not asking an irrelevant question. One recalls the post-World War II statement by Martin Niemoller, a German pastor, who said he did not speak up when the authorities came for everyone else, so when they came for him, there was no one left to speak up for him.

Christian groups are playing with fire in supporting this government kidnapping. Once the legal precedent is set for government to take children with no evidence of abuse -- and we see that clearly here -- do Christians believe that the authorities will stop with taking people from "unorthodox" religious groups?

No, this is nothing but a dry run for taking children from Christian families, since in the future, they also will be labeled as "cults." But instead of protests, we see Christian pastors and organizations being cheerleaders for this state-sponsored kidnapping because these people.

Unfortunately, Christian families in the future will pay for this with the lives of their own children.

Will, you have been a voice in the wilderness in this sorry and horrid tale. I'm glad that you understand what is happening, and appreciate your efforts on behalf of people who are not able to speak up for themselves.

Stevec wrote 'My understanding is that many of the...

2008-05-19T00:55:00.000-06:00

Stevec wrote 'My understanding is that many of these "single mothers" were on welfare.....Isn't it disengenuous to claim persecution from the state and simultaneously be milking the state through tax subsidized welfare?'

Well, that's why the polygamists call it "bleeding the beast". The rationale is, they would be perfectly capable of being an autonomous, self-sustaining community, only the state has pushed in; so, why not try to claw back something from the state?

If by "disingenuous" you mean something like "hypocritical", no, it's not. It would only be hypocrisy if they not only clawed back but also tried to keep the beast around for bleeding - but so far, the evidence is that they would rather the beast left. It's the beast that made the rules and won't leave, so where's the hypocrisy in using those against it?

But yes, it's "disingenuous", if by that you mean "not naive and well aware of the irony".

T2T, you're absolutely right -- the CPS should be ...

2008-05-18T21:38:00.000-06:00

T2T, you're absolutely right -- the CPS should be abolished not only in Texas but everywhere else it wields its malign influence.

Quote from Will: "...the only acceptable outcome i...

2008-05-18T21:36:00.000-06:00

Quote from Will: "...the only acceptable outcome is the return of the children to all of the mothers and a round of firings, professional sanctions, and lawsuits against the people responsible for this mess.

At least, that's how I see it."

How about getting rid of the CPS all together?

To the CPS dregs and all other statists:Woe to tho...

2008-05-18T19:35:00.000-06:00

To the CPS dregs and all other statists:

Woe to those who call evil good and good evil! -Isaiah

If the partner of that girl is less than a certain...

2008-05-18T17:53:00.000-06:00

If the partner of that girl is less than a certain number of years older than she is, that distance usually being 3 years, there is no crime.

"I think the point was that a pregnant 14 year old...

2008-05-18T16:10:00.000-06:00

"I think the point was that a pregnant 14 year old is not evidence of a crime." - hugh mcbryde

Not that I agree with such laws ... but in states which set higher ages for sexual consent, a pregnant 14-year-old usually IS evidence of the crime of statutory rape. The exception would be if the 14-year-old is married; but few are. So, in most cases, their partners have committed statutory rape, and the girl may have done so as well, if her partner was underage.

One survey in 2003 showed that 33 percent of 9th graders have had intercourse, rising to 62 percent in 12th grade. In a state such as Texas, where the age of sexual consent is 17, evidently a third of ninth-graders (or their partners) are guilty of the felony of statutory rape -- although, being underage, they might be entitled to trial in juvenile instead of adult court.

But like many other laws which minors flout -- such as prohibitions on their using alcohol, tobacco and drugs -- actual enforcement of statutory rape laws is the exception rather than the rule. It's not as if prosecutors are hauling pregnant 14-year-olds before grand juries to identify their partners. Public opinion probably wouldn't stand for it.

So statutory rape ends up being one of those "gotcha" laws. Most parents quietly tolerate sexual activity among underage teenagers. But the occasional parent who wants to call the authorities can cause one or both of them tremendous trouble.

The police state hasn't yet progressed to the point that a pregnant 14-year-old automatically triggers a criminal investigation. But a dangerous mixed message is sent when birth control is made available to underage teenagers, while at the same time the law provides that they and/or their partners could be prosecuted for statutory rape if caught.

The basic problem seems to be that statutory rape is (in the case of "consenting" teenagers, both underaged) a victimless crime; while in other cases (say, a 22-year-old exploiting a 14-year-old) it is NOT a victimless crime. But the rigid assembly-line definitions of modern criminal law make no such fine distinctions, and basically criminalize sexual precocity. This is another example of state intervention into what used to be a private family matter.

The heads of the DPS are sick sadists. The most p...

2008-05-18T11:50:00.000-06:00

The heads of the DPS are sick sadists. The most pure form of evil. These poor women should have taken their children and fled the state the minute these fuckers came prowling around the premises.

It is interesting that every e-mail we send or rec...

2008-05-18T10:07:00.000-06:00

It is interesting that every e-mail we send or receive has to be stored in perpetuity for use against us by the Feds. Fortunately for us Google's cache feature gives us a little bit of that against them (until memory hole legislation allows them to force everyone to destroy unfavorable evidence against them).

I think the point was that a pregnant 14 year old ...

2008-05-17T23:37:00.000-06:00

I think the point was that a pregnant 14 year old is not evidence of a crime.