Posted on 04/13/2008 8:57:18 PM PDT by claudiustg
SAN ANGELO — A Texas judge on Sunday ordered law enforcement officials to immediately confiscate all cell phones in the possession of FLDS women and children now housed in temporary quarters here. "I just called to say, hi. They are about to collect the phones, I think," one soft-spoken FLDS woman said during a telephone call to another member of the Fundamentalist LDS Church who was outside of the shelter. "I don't like what they're doing."
Several of the women inside the shelters spoke by cell phone to the Deseret News on Saturday to describe the living conditions there. Children could be heard crying in the background of each conversation. The News published an article on Sunday, quoting the women who complained there was no privacy and that their children were getting sick.
FLDS faithful outside the shelter are convinced Sunday's court order is a direct result of the women speaking to the newspaper.
"This is nothing more than retaliation of Child Protective Services to punish those who were disclosing what is really happening behind the walls of this concentration camp," said Don, an FLDS member who asked that his last name not be used. "These are my family members."
(Excerpt) Read more at deseretnews.com ...
What is the matter with you rape apologists?
DOZENS OF PREGNANT LITTLE GIRLS IS PROOF OF WRONGDOING.
My tagline becomes more apparent daily.
You mentioned that their "Constitutional rights" were violated...I assumed you meant the Federal government, not TX, actually. (The Constitution is a limit on the government.* Therefore, you were stating that the government violated their rights.)
Now, if you are referring to violations of their natural-law rights by others, such as saying they were imprisoned, etc., then these are crimes, just like the sexual acts with children are crimes. And there are procedures for prosecuting the criminals.
But so far, there haven't been charges of such.
*Can you imagine if they applied in private dealings!?
"Did you take a cookie from the cookie jar, Gondring?"> :-)
"I am asserting my Fifth Amendment privilege...oh, and I demand my right to a jury trial!"
“Note, also, that if a mother wasn’t at the ranch at the time of the raid, they won’t let her go check on her children.”
When the CPS of Texas took the children into custody, they offered to take along the moms.(figurative moms) At least they had some clue that these moms were the ‘current’ acting mother.
Imagine if you were the CPS, and had some children, without their ‘mom’.
Women call, or show up, or protest to the news that they have been separated from their child.
The moms also refuse to divulge who their ‘husband’ is, and who their ‘biological’ children are, and who their ‘non-biological’ children are.
The children also refuse.
Very few, if any of these ‘moms’ DNA will even match to those of their claimed ‘children’.
So..... what do you do?
Thanks for the link to that article.
Here is an interesting statement from it.
“Everyone was telling us we’d all be together today. How could somebody do that?” she asked. “Who is going to be holding the little 3-year-old boy I was caring for?”
Once the State of Texas sorts out the DNA results.
Not if the CPS has its way.
Besides... would you please define "Real Mother?"
I doubt there are any women OR MEN FReepers who believe that.
Do you still beat your wife?
I don't see any of them here on this thread.
So what's the matter with you name-calling anti-American strawman-constructing ad-hominem-slinging Hectors? ;-)
Why are you against peoples' rights being respected?
Are you...
And I am not trying to be funny...someone upthread pointed out that their are several color selections...I am just noting that the light purples seem to be camera ready...
(the bitter) PaMom
And many of the children don’t know their surname. Remember, the name given at the hospital by the beaten 16 y/o matches the name several of the teenage girls from the ranch have given the TX officials. Pre-planned response? When dealing with an evil outsider, remember girls, you are Mary Smith.
And this supposed 16-year-old who supposedly called multiple times to a womens' shelter...and reported the name of a guy who wasn't even at the ranch...couldn't say, "hey, I'm the one who called" when questioned alone?
Sure.
Even if she had second thoughts before, now that the raid occurred, you'd think that she could feel like talking if she was brave enough and determined enough to call multiple times.
But heck, we don't even know where the calls came from...or why they were fingering a guy who wasn't there.
IOW, it's all speculation...but does seem a bit fishy.
Or she may be dead, or have been moved before the LEO got in.
Seems like a lot of people don’t give a rip about the fact that anyone who was not a 50+ year old male in that compound had no Constitutional rights. They weren’t permitted it by their leaders.
A hypothesis that neglects the fact that there are several other women--in different-colored dresses--also in photographs on the same page I got that one from. I suppose AOL is part of the cult, being directed by the men as to which photo to run on the opening page...? Better take the cell phones of all AOL employees now! Oh, and subscribers...never know what they might do!
Don't worry...it's okay...after all, these children lived under bad conditions, so it's okay to take away other peoples' cell phones.
Hello. They don't need it. This is CPS.
Do you not realize that what they're doing here is just standard operating procedure in ANY alleged child abuse cases?
All social services needs to investigate you is an anonymous call into a hotline and they're at your door. You let them in and you're toast. They WILL find something to grab your kids on, be it laundry on the couch or dirty dishes in the sink, and that's been done.
They can go into the public school and interrogate your kids without your knowledge or permission. You find out when they don't come home from school, instead a social worker shows up at your door and tells you they're in foster care and you don't know where.
It happens. I've seen it and I know foster parents.
People are so worried about this setting precedent and us losing our Constitutional rights but what so many apparently don't realize is that they're FOLLOWING procedure, not setting it, and this is where we are in regards to our Constitutional rights.
Could be moved, could be dead, could not have ever existed. My problem is that some people can’t seem to entertain the thought that she does not exist.
Or that she represents hundreds of girls. They're all in her situation.
Should law enforcement not have acted? They get a call for help that implies immanent danger. What do you expect them to do? Decide if the person really exists before they do anything?
Exactly! Only the leaders had a say in so many lives. This thought also struck me today....I wonder how many girls tried to hide, from their "mother", the fact that they had started their periods? I figure those little girls knew what their fate was once they became a "woman" so they hid it as long as they could.
Can you not really admit (even with them best of intentions) that every hour that passes without the girl being found is more indication of fraud?
Why does she have to be found? If I call CPS, anonymously, about suspicions I may have regarding sexual abuse in my neighbor’s home, it has to be checked out. In fact, as a school employee, I can actually be prosecuted if I don’t report any suspicions about a child being abused I may have.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.