Replies

Luis, if it turns out that what I've been reading, and repeating here, is untrue, I will apologize, as well I should. What I said about projecting is not really beneath me. You stated that you wouldn't be surprised to see us write that the child being taken was some kind of divine retribution--a thought that simply horrifies me. You are projecting certain beliefs onto me (and possibly others) that couldn't be further from the truth. Now will you apologize for that? SneakyPete not only misquotes me, but suggests I think all sex is evil. Again, nothing could be further from the truth.

Note to debate participants: if we find out we're wrong about something, it's okay to apologize. Several points gained, no points lost.

Meanwhile, having said "my say" about what I think of the van Dam kidnapping, I'm going to wait before saying more until the facts start coming out. And they will, probably not only via the news, but also through books, teevee movies, and articles in Vanity Fair (or some such). Luis, if you're right about none of this being true, I will return to this thread and apologize.

Pete, I'm not apologizing to you for any reason because you were dead wrong about everything you said about me. You assumed things that are so far off-base, one might almost wonder if you're hallucinating. You don't know me. You don't know anything about me, and you've just proven it.

"You stated that you wouldn't be surprised to see us write that the child being taken was some kind of divine retribution..."

Then why the innordinate amount of time on this thread by some posters on the sin that the parents are guilty of?

I have yet to read anywhere that the people who came home with Mrs. Van Dam (if indeed some came home with her) where not the same people who went out with her, other than an unsubstantiated rumour that is, and they obviously know the neighbor being questioned. As best as I can tell, once I get past all the creative slandering in FR, there are no credible reports that a) Mrs. Van Dam brought home barflies whom she had just met, b) that there was an orgy that night, or c) that there where drugs involved.

This leads me to believe that if indeed someone outside the family harmed Danielle, it is someone whom the family knows. That's the case with most of these cases. Someone who the family and the child trusts does the harm.

Yet, FReepers are busy making up news. That pisses me off, I expect better than that from FReepers.

If these facts come to light, then I will form an opinion. I certainly WILL NOT do that without concrete evidence or information.

And if I am wrong, you will hear from me.