 |
| ???? |
The only question which remains is - will the U.S. charge the wives for polygamy, since they were complicit in the crime?
Showing posts with label Muslim polygamy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Muslim polygamy. Show all posts
Wednesday, May 11, 2011
The Greater Crime
The only question which remains is - will the U.S. charge the wives for polygamy, since they were complicit in the crime?
Saturday, December 5, 2009
Barbie Freaks Out
I was delighted last night to read the following article:
http://www.gosanangelo.com/news/2009/dec/04/judge-challenged-in-trial-of-flds-members-motion/?print=1
It reported the "Barbie in Wonderland" proceedings in the courtroom. I never cease to be amazed at the skewed exercise of justice in Barbarous Wart-hog's court. Let's face it folks - she HATES the FLDS. She wants them imprisoned. She would do anything she could reasonably get away with to aid the prosecutors who are trying these cases. It is no different from the arbitrary, improvised system of justice inflicted on the Mormons in Missouri and Illinois in the 1840s.
If I were an FLDS member, I would be very heartened by yesterday's developments. Barbie's shameless distortion of proper procedures HAS to get her into hot water eventually. It is fascinating to watch a person so drunken with pride and hubris continue to believe that she is immune from accountability and comeuppance. Now that she has been challenged to recuse herself, maybe we have a chance to get these pleadings before a judge who understands the concept of judicial impartiality.
It has been ably noted elsewhere, but Rozita Swinton's misdemeanor trial (for making hoax phone calls) has been postponed to the point of absurdity and is now the oldest outstanding misdemeanor case in Texas. Clearly, Texas doesn't want to admit that THE RAID was a terrible mistake and that the evidence seizure was at least a stretch of Constitutional guidelines.
Why cannot these politicians prefer truth and honor over power and security? How can they sleep at night, knowing that they are exploiting a minority people for gain? No, the FLDS are not perfect, but their imperfections do not justify gross persecution. There is a joke that goes:
How can you tell when a politician is lying? - - - - When his lips are moving.
Obama exulted yesterday that he has achieved a major success, in that the nation's unemployment figures went from 10.2% last month to 10%. "Great news in time for the 'Season of Hope' " !!!!!!
Our buddy, Bill, revealed that, unlike Laura Bush, who had one personal assistant, Michelle Obama has 22 (at a cost of $1.5M per year). These people are crooks and embezzlers - Marxist oligarchs who arrogate titles of nobility to themselves. They should read the Bible to learn what happens to those who are "puffed up".
I actually feel like praying for Barbie - that she will come to a bright recognition of the cruelty of her ways, and experience an epiphany on the "road to Damascus". The freight train is coming down the tracks, Barbie, and I pray that you will have the sense to get out of the way (if only for the sake of all those blond-haired, blue-eyed little children).
http://www.gosanangelo.com/news/2009/dec/04/judge-challenged-in-trial-of-flds-members-motion/?print=1
It reported the "Barbie in Wonderland" proceedings in the courtroom. I never cease to be amazed at the skewed exercise of justice in Barbarous Wart-hog's court. Let's face it folks - she HATES the FLDS. She wants them imprisoned. She would do anything she could reasonably get away with to aid the prosecutors who are trying these cases. It is no different from the arbitrary, improvised system of justice inflicted on the Mormons in Missouri and Illinois in the 1840s.
If I were an FLDS member, I would be very heartened by yesterday's developments. Barbie's shameless distortion of proper procedures HAS to get her into hot water eventually. It is fascinating to watch a person so drunken with pride and hubris continue to believe that she is immune from accountability and comeuppance. Now that she has been challenged to recuse herself, maybe we have a chance to get these pleadings before a judge who understands the concept of judicial impartiality.
It has been ably noted elsewhere, but Rozita Swinton's misdemeanor trial (for making hoax phone calls) has been postponed to the point of absurdity and is now the oldest outstanding misdemeanor case in Texas. Clearly, Texas doesn't want to admit that THE RAID was a terrible mistake and that the evidence seizure was at least a stretch of Constitutional guidelines.
Why cannot these politicians prefer truth and honor over power and security? How can they sleep at night, knowing that they are exploiting a minority people for gain? No, the FLDS are not perfect, but their imperfections do not justify gross persecution. There is a joke that goes:
How can you tell when a politician is lying? - - - - When his lips are moving.
Obama exulted yesterday that he has achieved a major success, in that the nation's unemployment figures went from 10.2% last month to 10%. "Great news in time for the 'Season of Hope' " !!!!!!
Our buddy, Bill, revealed that, unlike Laura Bush, who had one personal assistant, Michelle Obama has 22 (at a cost of $1.5M per year). These people are crooks and embezzlers - Marxist oligarchs who arrogate titles of nobility to themselves. They should read the Bible to learn what happens to those who are "puffed up".
I actually feel like praying for Barbie - that she will come to a bright recognition of the cruelty of her ways, and experience an epiphany on the "road to Damascus". The freight train is coming down the tracks, Barbie, and I pray that you will have the sense to get out of the way (if only for the sake of all those blond-haired, blue-eyed little children).
Friday, October 30, 2009
Barbie Gets Her Way (Part Three)
Okay, I know I'm belaboring this topic, but it keeps growing wings.
I talked to an attorney today who is very familiar with the FLDS legal cases. The attorney told me that the reason that the Texas appellate court has not yet reviewed the FLDS's motion to suppress the (obviously illegally-obtained) evidence from the April 2008 raid is that someone has to be convicted first before the issue can be reviewed. What will they think of next ??? !!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Am I the only one who finds this constitutionally questionable? If Raymond Jessop gets convicted (which, at the rate things are going, might take 18 months), then the appeals court can finally review the evidence suppression motion. If Jessop is acquitted (for lack of jurisdiction, evidence, witnesses, etc.), then the FLDS must wait again for an opportunity for vindication, and must almost pray for a conviction if they ever hope to obtain justice and a reversal (!?!?!?!?!?!?!). Why should so many people be subjected to trials before a flagrant error can be corrected?
One can almost envision a string of nine or ten belabored trials with hate-mongers like K.D. Ignatin and Sam Brower slinking around the courthouse grounds with irrelevant placards trumpeting "Polygamy Equals Abuse", and reporters from all over the globe craning for a spicy story. What is driving this crusade? - a lust to confiscate highly-adoptable, cute white kids? Barbarous Warthug craving revenge for the shaming? Bigotry against a poorly understood minority, Demonic possession? Carolyn Jessop? Intestinal Flora? Beats me.
Doesn't Schleicher County have something better to do with the few dollars it has left?
I talked to an attorney today who is very familiar with the FLDS legal cases. The attorney told me that the reason that the Texas appellate court has not yet reviewed the FLDS's motion to suppress the (obviously illegally-obtained) evidence from the April 2008 raid is that someone has to be convicted first before the issue can be reviewed. What will they think of next ??? !!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Am I the only one who finds this constitutionally questionable? If Raymond Jessop gets convicted (which, at the rate things are going, might take 18 months), then the appeals court can finally review the evidence suppression motion. If Jessop is acquitted (for lack of jurisdiction, evidence, witnesses, etc.), then the FLDS must wait again for an opportunity for vindication, and must almost pray for a conviction if they ever hope to obtain justice and a reversal (!?!?!?!?!?!?!). Why should so many people be subjected to trials before a flagrant error can be corrected?
One can almost envision a string of nine or ten belabored trials with hate-mongers like K.D. Ignatin and Sam Brower slinking around the courthouse grounds with irrelevant placards trumpeting "Polygamy Equals Abuse", and reporters from all over the globe craning for a spicy story. What is driving this crusade? - a lust to confiscate highly-adoptable, cute white kids? Barbarous Warthug craving revenge for the shaming? Bigotry against a poorly understood minority, Demonic possession? Carolyn Jessop? Intestinal Flora? Beats me.
Doesn't Schleicher County have something better to do with the few dollars it has left?
Friday, October 23, 2009
Canada is at it again !!!
If last month's shaming of British Columbia's former Attorney General, Wally Oppal, wasn't enough, his successor, Mike de Jong, wants to revisit the illegality of polygamy in Canada. I am confident that, over the decades since polygamists have occupied the Creston/Bountiful area of B.C., there have been several disaffected people who have left the communities and have something to complain about (my sister-wife spanked my kid; my husband didn't spend enough time with me; I had to eat oatmeal; I don't like long dresses; etc., etc. ad nauseam).
I think also that a lot of young women may have been married in their mid teens back in the day when marrying in the mid teens was fashionable and widely acceptable.
None of this has anything to do with the question of whether a man may marry a first wife legally and then add other women to his "family" through an informal religious ceremony and then proceed to conjugate with them.
Mike de Jong wants the Supreme Court to settle the confusion which has been created between Canada's Charter of Rights and Freedoms (which guarantees freedom of religious conduct) and Canada's century-old anti-polygamy law which reads -
Polygamy
293. (1) Every one who
(a) practises or enters into or in any manner agrees or consents to practise or enter into
(i) any form of polygamy, or
(ii) any kind of conjugal union with more than one person at the same time,
whether or not it is by law recognized as a binding form of marriage, or
(b) celebrates, assists or is a party to a rite, ceremony, contract or consent that purports to sanction a relationship mentioned in subparagraph (a)(i) or (ii),
is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years.
Evidence in case of polygamy
(2) Where an accused is charged with an offence under this section, no averment or proof of the method by which the alleged relationship was entered into, agreed to or consented to is necessary in the indictment or on the trial of the accused, nor is it necessary on the trial to prove that the persons who are alleged to have entered into the relationship had or intended to have sexual intercourse.
R.S., c. C-34, s. 257.
------------------------------
I admit that I do not know Mike de Jong's motives, but it seems that any layperson can see that the language of the law is reprehensible, and the Court ought to strike it. Paragraph (2) basically says that no WITNESSES ("averment") or PROOF is needed of the commission of the alleged crime, AND it need also not be shown that the accused had or wanted to have sex. In other words - YOU ARE GUILTY BECAUSE I SAID SO !!!
I would rejoice that we do not have so dumb a law here in the U.S., but Utah's anti-bigamy statute runs a close second.
So, what will the Canadian Court do? Canada has tens of thousands of respectable Muslim polygamous families. If the B.C. fundamentalist Mormons are molesting teen girls, then charge them with the pertinent offences under existing rape/molestation/sex-with-a-minor laws. Methinks that B.C. would have done that long ago, had the RCMP found a shred of evidence during its multi-year inquisition.
Bottom line - YOU CANNOT write an anti-polygamy law without impermissibly targeting a specific religious minority. You also CANNOT write one without colliding with existing fornication and adultery statutes which no "right-thinking" western nation has enforced since Wilford Woodruff made his covenant with death and agreement with hell.
So have at it, Supreme Court, twist your brains, bend the phrasing, enlist the brightest legal minds north of Idaho and Montana, and show me how to prosecute a guy for having sex with two adult women (in the same month) to whom he is not legally married, and I will personally move to Canada and test the law.
I feel like these anti-polygamy activists and their suck-up politicians are unwittingly bringing about precisely the opposite outcome from what they really want. Before the U.S. Supreme Court declared homosexual sex a basic Constitutional liberty in 2003, gays in Oklahoma and Texas were legally required to go to the county courthouse and register themselves as SEX-OFFENDERS !!!!!!!!
Perhaps the world needs to come to an end before foolish people will realize their folly.
Today on Fox News I actually heard a financial correspondent say that the Federal Reserve is "an independent part of the U.S. government" !!!
Vote Bernanke !!!
I think also that a lot of young women may have been married in their mid teens back in the day when marrying in the mid teens was fashionable and widely acceptable.
None of this has anything to do with the question of whether a man may marry a first wife legally and then add other women to his "family" through an informal religious ceremony and then proceed to conjugate with them.
Mike de Jong wants the Supreme Court to settle the confusion which has been created between Canada's Charter of Rights and Freedoms (which guarantees freedom of religious conduct) and Canada's century-old anti-polygamy law which reads -
Polygamy
293. (1) Every one who
(a) practises or enters into or in any manner agrees or consents to practise or enter into
(i) any form of polygamy, or
(ii) any kind of conjugal union with more than one person at the same time,
whether or not it is by law recognized as a binding form of marriage, or
(b) celebrates, assists or is a party to a rite, ceremony, contract or consent that purports to sanction a relationship mentioned in subparagraph (a)(i) or (ii),
is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years.
Evidence in case of polygamy
(2) Where an accused is charged with an offence under this section, no averment or proof of the method by which the alleged relationship was entered into, agreed to or consented to is necessary in the indictment or on the trial of the accused, nor is it necessary on the trial to prove that the persons who are alleged to have entered into the relationship had or intended to have sexual intercourse.
R.S., c. C-34, s. 257.
------------------------------
I admit that I do not know Mike de Jong's motives, but it seems that any layperson can see that the language of the law is reprehensible, and the Court ought to strike it. Paragraph (2) basically says that no WITNESSES ("averment") or PROOF is needed of the commission of the alleged crime, AND it need also not be shown that the accused had or wanted to have sex. In other words - YOU ARE GUILTY BECAUSE I SAID SO !!!
I would rejoice that we do not have so dumb a law here in the U.S., but Utah's anti-bigamy statute runs a close second.
So, what will the Canadian Court do? Canada has tens of thousands of respectable Muslim polygamous families. If the B.C. fundamentalist Mormons are molesting teen girls, then charge them with the pertinent offences under existing rape/molestation/sex-with-a-minor laws. Methinks that B.C. would have done that long ago, had the RCMP found a shred of evidence during its multi-year inquisition.
Bottom line - YOU CANNOT write an anti-polygamy law without impermissibly targeting a specific religious minority. You also CANNOT write one without colliding with existing fornication and adultery statutes which no "right-thinking" western nation has enforced since Wilford Woodruff made his covenant with death and agreement with hell.
So have at it, Supreme Court, twist your brains, bend the phrasing, enlist the brightest legal minds north of Idaho and Montana, and show me how to prosecute a guy for having sex with two adult women (in the same month) to whom he is not legally married, and I will personally move to Canada and test the law.
I feel like these anti-polygamy activists and their suck-up politicians are unwittingly bringing about precisely the opposite outcome from what they really want. Before the U.S. Supreme Court declared homosexual sex a basic Constitutional liberty in 2003, gays in Oklahoma and Texas were legally required to go to the county courthouse and register themselves as SEX-OFFENDERS !!!!!!!!
Perhaps the world needs to come to an end before foolish people will realize their folly.
Today on Fox News I actually heard a financial correspondent say that the Federal Reserve is "an independent part of the U.S. government" !!!
Vote Bernanke !!!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
