Conference yukon::christian_v7

 Great..


 This group sounds like "Teen Challenge".  A friend of mine went through
 it (TC) and said had it not been there, he'd be dead today.  It turned his
 life around, and the man's testimony is among the most powerful I have ever
 heard.




 Jim

    	What little I've read about it, it appears to me to be a lack of
    	communication on both sides.

    They should be happy AG Reno's ATF agents didn't come in shooting and
    with flame throwing tanks. However, this should serve as a warning
    to them. 

    Constitution,... what's that ?

    Jim

 Hey..we can't have these religious right fanatics trying to get our kids
straightened out..




Jim

	My knee-jerk, religious-extremist reaction is that they probably
need a better, more pro-active lawyer.  Have they called the ACLJ yet?

The DSS ought to be spanked!

    I read in the paper today about this in the Colorado Spring
    Gazette Telegraph - take into account that this has not
    been proven.  Alledgedly they were handcuffing children to
    their beds and and one time a couselor rammed a car with a
    truck because one of the students was trying to get away.
    
    I just glanced at the paper.  Will read more tonight and
    if anyone wants an update I will post.
    
    Pam<

	Sounds to me like they should have been closed down. Not because of the
alleged abuse, but because they were given ample time to fill out the paperwork
needed to have the place open. If they were told that by X date the facility
would be closed unless the paperwork was done, then if they felt it was unjust
they should have gone to court BEFORE the date the facility was to be closed to
keep it open. To send a letter stating we don't feel we have to and contact our
lawyer if you have more questions is not enough. If the state feels the place
is in violation, then it is up to the place to show why it is not. Hopefully
the child abuse claims are false, but we'll have to wait on that one.


Glen

    	Reading the personal stories of kids who attended the school and
    	were turned around from juvenile delinquency into decent kids
    	makes me believe that the school was doing a great service to
    	society.  It's a shame, then, that they got so stubborn and 
    	didn't work with the system to ensure their ability to continue.
    	I also think it's a shame that the system didn't do more to let
    	the school know of the risks it faced by its non-compliance.

    I think, what bothers me the most about this story isn't the fact they
    got shut down, but the fact that 25 officials stormed in, guns drawn to
    like in the movies, to control4 people, 2 adults and 2 kids. They held
    the kids at gun point for several minutes, then subjected them to
    questioning and physical exams before releasing them to their parents.
    The parents had not been notified of the exams until after they had
    been completed.
    
    I don't think the gastapo tactics were necessary, regardless of what
    the school had failed to do.... Unfortunately, I think they used the
    child abuse issue to justify the gastapo style raid.....
    
    

| <<< Note 553.13 by BSS::GROVER "The CIRCUIT_MAN" >>>


| I think, what bothers me the most about this story isn't the fact they got 
| shut down, but the fact that 25 officials stormed in, guns drawn to like in 
| the movies, to control4 people, 2 adults and 2 kids. They held the kids at gun
| point for several minutes, then subjected them to questioning and physical 
| exams before releasing them to their parents. The parents had not been 
| notified of the exams until after they had been completed.

	Well, it's kind of funny how on one hand, some say that the press over
does it's stories to the point that the truth can't be known, and then some of
these same people turn around and with what the very people that they say don't
tell the truth, or push their own point, back them on a story that has not been
proven yet, and then they ONLY zero in on one aspect of the story, totally
ignoring what the other side said they did. Sorry, it can't work this way. At
least without it appearing to be hypocritical.

| I don't think the gastapo tactics were necessary, regardless of what the 
| school had failed to do.... 

	IF those were the tactics used, and IF the people going in knew how
many adults would be in there, and IF they knew that these same adults were
unarmed, then yeah, you have a definite gripe. One I think the school could
bring to court. But if they did NOT know what to expect BEFORE they went in,
then I'm sorry to inform you, but in this world, and when going in to make
arrests where the situation is not known, you prepare for the worst. BTW,
didn't the story also say that one side said the door was busted open, the
other side said it was not? It should be easy enough to see if it was busted
open, and if it was not, then credibility of the school is in question. If it
was busted open, then the credibility of the police is in question. But it
should be easy to discover who is lieing. 

| Unfortunately, I think they used the child abuse issue to justify the 
| gastapo style raid.....

	IF it happened that way at all! As far as child abuse goes, I don't
care how many kids it may have straightened out, if child abuse is present,
then the ends don't justify the means. AND, if child abuse has/is occuring,
then it may be a while before we see what results the child abuse had on the
people they were supposed to of helped.


Glen

    	What, exactly, is "child abuse"?  In this case it may be nothing
    	more than an emotion-ladened word.  In addition the news reports
    	have repeatedly mentioned sexual abuse, but have not even hinted
    	at what those abuses were, nor have authorities mentioned the
    	nature of the sexual abuse.  Again, so far it is just another
    	emotion-evoking term.

	Did anyone notice that Governor Romer has now announced plans for
expanded State-run reform schools (says he prefers calling them
"alternative schools").  Looks like maybe he wanted to to eliminate the
competition first.

| <<< Note 553.15 by CSC32::J_OPPELT "Oracle-bound" >>>

| What, exactly, is "child abuse"?  In this case it may be nothing more than an 
| emotion-ladened word.  

	Agreed. But if you heard the school your kids went to had complaints
about child abuse, would you ask questions first, or pull your kid out and then
ask questions? Take law enforcement. What if they went, asked questions, and
did nothing, and it was found later that the place had abused the children?
What does that say for the law enforcement? While it may seem like a backwards
approach, it does make sense that when kids are involved, their safety has to
be the first thing taken into consideration. 

| In addition the news reports have repeatedly mentioned sexual abuse, but have 
| not even hinted at what those abuses were, nor have authorities mentioned the
| nature of the sexual abuse. Again, so far it is just another emotion-evoking 
| term.

	Or, because they want to get the facts down before anyone says anything
to the press..... like they are still investigating? It could turn out that one
kid was making it all up, it could turn out that it never happened. It could
turn out true. Someone made a claim of abuse. That is what has been released to
the press. Until it is proven, they don't talk about it. Makes sense, doesn't
it?


Glen

    So, these people who ran the school are considered guilty until they
    can prove they are innocent... AND even after found innocent, the stigma
    of the event will never go away... Most are ruined for ever... 

    This is OK with some folks..????? I don't think it's OK with me! I'd
    probably expect the kids to be separated from the environment.. BUT,
    then a rational investigate would be done without the waving of
    firearms and threats... 

    I still believe a person should be considered innocent until proven
    guilty.... I also think the media should be held responsible for giving
    facts only, and not sensationalizing and distorting the truth to sell a
    story or boost ratings.
    
    

    It won't be long now...the fundamentalist Christian churches are next. 
    It will somehow be tied into RICO, since fundamentalists refuse to
    accept politically correct issues like abortion.
    
    I wonder how long until politically active churches get raided.  Bet
    the controlled media already has a smear campaign ready to assault
    these evil cults with.
    
    Sorry folks, there is no way I can condone 25 armed officials raiding
    a school of 14...papers or no papers.  This is complete violation of
    due process, as well as an incredible lack of common sense.  Somehow I
    am not surprised that federal authorities were involved.
    
    Child abuse accusations will only get more and more frequent, and will
    be used to shut down the politically incorrect institutions.  The
    public has already been indoctrinated to accept any misjustice by our
    government, as long as such charges are spread about the media (whether
    true or not).  And with all the publicity of church leaders being
    involved in sexual molestation of children, the public is geared to
    believe that church leaders/groups are guilty until proven innocent.
    
    Waco was only the beginning.  Now that the government knows the sheep
    will believe whatever they are told through the controlled media, and
    that we are so incredibly apethetic to anything not happening in our
    own home, the real assault on our civil rights can now begin.  There is
    no more need of veiled and peicemeal attacks. 
    
    I am no longer proud to be an American.  This country is not the one
    our FF left us.  We have already given up our sovereignity, though most
    folks do not know this yet.  With GATT and a certain UN treaty passed
    by the Senate on April 2, 1992, we are on our way to a NWO.  Even the
    back of our $1 bill says as much.
    
    
    -steve 
                                                   

| <<< Note 553.18 by BSS::GROVER "The CIRCUIT_MAN" >>>


| So, these people who ran the school are considered guilty until they can 
| prove they are innocent... 

	No, but if abuse is a claim, the children are the important thing.
Would you leave your children anywhere when a charge of child abuse has been
made?

| AND even after found innocent, the stigma of the event will never go away... 
| Most are ruined for ever...

	I highly doubt it. 

| This is OK with some folks..????? I don't think it's OK with me! I'd probably 
| expect the kids to be separated from the environment.. BUT, then a rational 
| investigate would be done without the waving of firearms and threats...

	It hasn't been proven that this was done yet.

| I still believe a person should be considered innocent until proven guilty....
| I also think the media should be held responsible for giving facts only, and 
| not sensationalizing and distorting the truth to sell a story or boost ratings

	Well, a charge of abuse was made, they reported it. Tell me how they
blew it out of proportion.


Glen

	Steve, ever think about moving to another country? You don't seem to
think much of this one.....

    	.17
    
>	Agreed. But if you heard the school your kids went to had complaints
>about child abuse, would you ask questions first, or pull your kid out and then
>ask questions? 
    
    	All of the parents interviewed (that I've seen reported so far
    	anyway) knew of no abuse, and approved of the corporal punishment
    	methods the school employs.  In fact, in many cases that's why they 
    	chose the school in the first place!
    
>	Or, because they want to get the facts down before anyone says anything
>to the press..... like they are still investigating? 
    
    	Agreed.  So I wonder why the unsubstantiated allegations have to
    	be released if they are unwilling to release details until they
    	have the story straight...
    
>Until it is proven, they don't talk about it. Makes sense, doesn't
>it?
    
    	Agreed.  But they *HAVE* talked about it -- only by mentioning
    	the rumor, which can be much more damaging than releasing the
    	substantiating facts, if they even exist.

    	.20

>| AND even after found innocent, the stigma of the event will never go away... 
>| Most are ruined for ever...
>
>	I highly doubt it. 

    	It's "head out of the sand time" Glen.  Many people accused of
    	abuse or crimes or other stigma-raising behaviors are often
    	ruined by it -- even after exoneration.

>	Agreed. But if you heard the school your kids went to had complaints
>about child abuse, would you ask questions first, or pull your kid out and then
>ask questions? 

What if a person was simply in a high risk group but not KNOWN to have 
contracted HIV?  What if the complaints swirled around the person being 
in a High Risk group and complaints were filed on rumors.

Maybe you're right.  Maybe we should protect the kids, and ask questions
later.  

Now who promotes hysteria?

>>              <<< Note 553.24 by BIGQ::SILVA "Memories....." >>>
>>
>>	Steve, ever think about moving to another country? You don't seem to
>>think much of this one.....
	
	while (1) printf ("????!!!!");
		
	I've been RO lately, and infrequently at that, because of workload.
	My usual reaction to Mr Silva is NEXT/UNSEEN, but I had to respond
	this time.

	Tony
		

        To clarify .25,

	.24 was among the least edifying responses I've seen to date. Such
	a response was once the standard from Klansmyn. Inversions of power
	create such strange phenomena. To paraphrase Pete Townsend, "Meet
	the new boss. Every bit as repressive as the old boss. Just a
	different set of what's going to be shoved down your throats."

	Sigh ...
		Tony
		

 I suppose those of us who would like to see this country return to the
 values it once held (and upon which it was founded) should just pack up
 and leave, eh?




Jim

    Glen,
    
    The reason I am so mad is because I do indeed love this country.  What
    makes me ashamed is that we are systematically destroying everything
    that once made this nation great, and calling it PROGRESS. 
    
    Am I to be proud of the agenda to give up US sovereignity??  The
    systematic destruction of our Constitution?  Proud that we teach a new
    morality in schools, while throwing out traditional Jud/Christian
    morality?
    
    
    We have turned the truth of God into lies.  I pray for this nation a
    lot, in hopes that it will come to its senses, that the leaders will
    once again become accountable and responsible in policy-making, that we
    will return to the ethics and morals we once embraced. 
    
    The ills of this nation and the world is not the increased population,
    but increased corruption.  The answers to the problems of this nation
    and the world are not more money and government controls, but more honest 
    prayer and putting God's will before our own.   Unfortunately, the
    world is being deceived on a grand scale with New Age religions, which
    are neither "new" nor of God (true religion is worship of God, at least
    that's the way I look at it...as did the FF).  They all come down to the 
    deifying of oneself...making God in our own image.  This is the
    original deception, right out of the garden of eden.
    
    I can't tell you how many times I've heard the phrase "my god wouldn't
    condemn anyone to hell...he/she is a loving god"..etc.  Of course
    *your* god won't do that...he won't do anything because he doesn't
    exist anywhere but in your own mind.   I like to ask "how do you know"? 
    I know because God left His word to tell me about Himself and how I
    should live my life.  Their god is one of their own making.
    
    My God says that there will be people condemned to hell...but when it
    all comes out, it will have been proven to all that such was *their own
    choice*.   Why is a free gift so hard for people to accept?  
    
    But I digress.  (as usual)
    
    -steve

RE:   <<< Note 553.27 by CSLALL::HENDERSON "I'm the traveller, He's the Way" >>>

> I suppose those of us who would like to see this country return to the
> values it once held (and upon which it was founded) should just pack up
> and leave, eh?

        Indeed, the values upon which this nation was founded are anathema
        to doubleplusgood newthinkers and newspeakers. In fact, revisionist
        history demonstrates that our nation's founders were doubleplusbad
        oppressors of womyn, Afrycans, and aboryginal peoples, unrelenting
        in their rabid pursuit of appeasing their male-warrior god. 

        After all, anyone can see how much better things are getting as we
        break the repressive yolk of the Judeo-Christian opiate of the
        masses. 

        Waco was just the American version of Tianamen square, where the
        dupes of Euro-centrist ideologies were crushed by the glorious
        victory of the people's cultural revolution. The engineers of the
        glorious Tianamen victory were rewarded for their defeat of the
        counter-revolutionalry demagogues with "most favored nation"
        trading status. 
	
	<<Flame off>>

	The next thing coming is the UN Treaty on the Rights of the Child.
	The enthusuastic and jubilant ideologues of the adulterous press
	say that this legislation is on a "fast track" in the Senate. This
	treaty will reduce parents to little more than breeders and closely
	monitored servants of the World State's (UN) wards, the children.
	Our federal government is on the brink of becoming a UN occupation
	government.
	
        May God have mercy on us and protect us from the emerging New World
        Order.

	Tony
	

| <<< Note 553.21 by CSC32::J_OPPELT "Oracle-bound" >>>


| All of the parents interviewed (that I've seen reported so far anyway) knew of
| no abuse, and approved of the corporal punishment methods the school employs.  
| In fact, in many cases that's why they chose the school in the first place!

	Joe, please try and make sense. If abuse was going on, and the parents
HEARD about it, would they leave their kids in. The key word, which was in my
note which addressed .17 was, IF you (the parent) heard that abuse was
happening, WOULD YOU (the parent), ask questions first or take your kids out
and then ask questions. With what you wrote above it shows the parents did not
know what was alledged against the school. 2 seperate situations.

| >	Or, because they want to get the facts down before anyone says anything
| >to the press..... like they are still investigating?

| Agreed.  So I wonder why the unsubstantiated allegations have to be released 

	Joe, other than the fact that someone said abuse was happening, what
other allegations have there been?

| >Until it is proven, they don't talk about it. Makes sense, doesn't
| >it?

| Agreed.  But they *HAVE* talked about it -- only by mentioning the rumor, 
| which can be much more damaging than releasing the substantiating facts, if 
| they even exist.

	Answer me this. If a police team goes into a school, takes the kids out
and questions them, do you think people will ask questions? Does it make sense
to give the facts known, which in this case is someone said they were abusing
the children, or does it make sense to keep totally quiet about it letting the
press really blow it out of proportion?


Glen

| <<< Note 553.22 by CSC32::J_OPPELT "Oracle-bound" >>>

| >| AND even after found innocent, the stigma of the event will never go away...
| >| Most are ruined for ever...
| >
| >	I highly doubt it.

| It's "head out of the sand time" Glen.  Many people accused of abuse or crimes
| or other stigma-raising behaviors are often ruined by it even after 
| exoneration.

	So Joe, if it is found that a student made up the whole story to get
even for some punishment, the school will still be looked down upon? This is
why I doubt it. BTW, the school already has one thing going against it's
credibility, they thought they were above the law.


Glen

| <<< Note 553.23 by TOKNOW::METCALFE "Eschew Obfuscatory Monikers" >>>

| >	Agreed. But if you heard the school your kids went to had complaints
| >about child abuse, would you ask questions first, or pull your kid out and then
| >ask questions?

| What if a person was simply in a high risk group but not KNOWN to have
| contracted HIV?  What if the complaints swirled around the person being
| in a High Risk group and complaints were filed on rumors.

	And Mark, tell me now, just how is someone in a high risk group who is
thought to have HIV (but not known) going to have someone come in and arrest
them because they are doing some sort of harm to the children? We know for a
fact that abuse harms children. How does HIV? You see, one is against the law,
the other is not. Not a very good example Mark.

| Now who promotes hysteria?

	Do you really want me to answer this?


Glen

    > I wonder how long until politically active churches get raided.  Bet
    >    the controlled media already has a smear campaign ready to assault
    >    these evil cults with.
    
    Already happened at a San Francisco Church. :-(
    
    

| <<< Note 553.27 by CSLALL::HENDERSON "I'm the traveller, He's the Way" >>>



| I suppose those of us who would like to see this country return to the values 
| it once held (and upon which it was founded) should just pack up and leave, eh

	Jim, I think if you really look back at the values, you'd see they
weren't all good. The bad stuff just weren't talked about much.


Glen

    In regards to PROGRESS:
    
    The city of Santa Clara is voting on an ordinance that would give
    tickets/fines to residents who don't retrieve their garbage cans in a
    timely fashion after the pick up!!!
    
    What happened to this is "my" property laws.  Granted I don't care much
    for trashy unkept homes in my neighborhood either, but I'd rather my
    FREEDOM to do so be left in TACT.
    
    I cannot believe what this country is doing... the citizens of this
    country no longer have FAMILY UNITS which is where the primary learning
    and etiquette should be taught, so now the GOVERNMENT is MOTHER and
    FATHER enforcing us to do that which was once an every day part of
    living.
    
    Remember the guy who wrote this:
    
    "Most of what I really need to know about how to live and what to do
    and how to be I learned in Kindergarten...."
    
    then he listed what he learned
    
    "Clean up your own mess, put away things you take out, share
    everything"
    
    Truth is Kindergarten isn't the issue, FAMILIES ARE.. :-(
    

    .34
    
    Glen.. remember this note?  I still believe this.
    
    
    The answer lies within accountability.  There once was accountability
    in this world.  Fathers were accountable to provide for their families. 
    Mothers were accountable to their children and homes.  Children were
    accountable to Mothers for there behavior, whereabouts and education.
    
    There was some order...  Of course, this wasn't perfect, there is no
    perfection in this life.  But this was as close to perfection as I
    believe that we can get.
    
    Since women are not going to be leaving their careers and run back home
    to provide for their children.. for many reasons, divorce, greed,
    mis-directed fulfillment :-), then there must be a way to bring
    accountability back into our lives.
    
    #1 pet peeve... Child abuse should be no excuse for violent crimes. 
    Child abuse should not be allowed to be entered into the courtroom as a
    defense for a person's behavior.
    
    I believe that Child Abuse should only be allowed to be offered and
    challanged for sentencing purposes.  I think our jails need to be
    re-defined and managed in a way to not just punish, but to reform.  
    
    Reformation of an inmate can mean strict discipline, hard work and
    counselling that is monitored by a more qualified probational board.
    
    #2 I think that parents who leave their children unattended while they
    work up to 18 years of age, should be fined.  Much like a traffic
    ticket... and the more tickets you get the bigger the fine.
    
    #3 I think we need to set up more after school and summer programs for
    all ages up to 18 or graduation from High School, instead of SEX
    educational programs.  If we had our kids in a place where they were
    accountable for their behavior, then SEX ed classes would become less
    and less needed.  I think also you would see a drop in drug usage.
    
    I also believe in this country, we tend to think that children who can
    feed, clothe and make their beds as grown up.  If you look at the ages
    of our youth being arrested for criminal activity you will find that
    15-18 year olds are on the top of the list.  Think parents who allow
    their teenagers to go unsupervised should be punished.  
    
    If you got a good kid, bravo... set him/her up to succeed by placing
    them in a position to be accountable for every after school or summer
    minute, while Mom and Dad work.
    
    We've lost it in this country... just lost it and our children to boot.
    
    

| <<< Note 553.28 by CSOA1::LEECH >>>



| My God says that there will be people condemned to hell...but when it
| all comes out, it will have been proven to all that such was *their own
| choice*.   Why is a free gift so hard for people to accept?

	By reality, it is a free gift Steve. But by humans, it is not. I won't
go into this deep, but you have some who are perceived as Christians that say
one thing, others who say another. You can never have full agreement on every
subject, which is correct in itself seeing we are human. We have corrupted what
He really wants, so while the gift is free, humans will never allow it to be
that way. Doesn't really matter much as we ain't here to impress the other
humans. We're here to serve Him.


Glen

| <<< Note 553.35 by JULIET::MORALES_NA "Sweet Spirit's Gentle Breeze" >>>




	Nancy, a couple of questions about where the trash cans are. Are they
set down on the sidewalk, end of the driveway, or somewhere else? Is the area
usually kept up nice except for the cans on trash day? I guess I ask because I
know a lot of people who have said that their neighborhoods got trashy, when
they used to look so nice. In Boston I know they have neighborhood committees
that will from time to time come up with ideas like the one you described, and
try and get it to be enforced.


Glen

    .37
    
    There is some truth to what you are saying Glen.  I cannot tell you I
    agree 100%, but you are correct in that each individual approaches
    salvation differently.
    
    The key is understanding what God says salvation is.  Where do you get
    your information Glen?  From an inner voice, from common sense, from
    the Bible?  From where does your knowledge of God come?
    
    It's hard for one who does not believe the Bible to be inerrant to
    grasp onto doctrines that believe it to be so.  It feels limiting,
    bonding and oftimes legalistic to those who will not see God has given
    us the plan of salvation for each human... and it's free, but it
    requires receipt of the gift.
    
    There is a difference between external condition and the internal
    condition and the only who can justly judge is God, Himself.
    On this I know we agree as well.
    
    Nancy

    .38
    
    What does it matter, Glen?  If it is on their OWN property, there
    should be no question about it. period, imho.
    
    

    	re .30, .31
    
>The key word, which was in my
>note which addressed .17 was, IF 
    
    	Exactly.  Too many of your scenarios require too many "if's".
    	You base your positions on quicksand.
    
>With what you wrote above it shows the parents did not
>know what was alledged against the school. 
    
    	But you seem to know.

>	Joe, other than the fact that someone said abuse was happening
    
    	Is it a fact?  How do you know?

>	Answer me this. If ...
    
    	Why go down so many "if"-holes?

	.37
    
>go into this deep, but you have some who are perceived as Christians that say
>one thing, others who say another. 
    
    	And yet others who claim to be christians saying something else.
    
>You can never have full agreement on every
>subject, which is correct in itself seeing we are human. 
    
    	It is only "correct in itself" to people like you who must have
    	such disagreement to self-affirm your own disagreements.  How
    	often do you try to use this "disagreement" in your arguments
    	here and elsewhere?
    
>We have corrupted what He really wants,
    
    	At least you recognize it.

    re: .34
    
    Well, no need to continue trying to educate you on this.  You have
    bought into the lie hook, line and sinker, and you don't even realize
    it.
    
    I'd sincerely like to know how you can prove the "it just wasn't talked
    about as much" philosophy.  It should prove fascinating.
    
    
    -steve

RE:               <<< Note 553.34 by BIGQ::SILVA "Memories....." >>>




>| I suppose those of us who would like to see this country return to the values 
>| it once held (and upon which it was founded) should just pack up and leave, eh

>	Jim, I think if you really look back at the values, you'd see they
>weren't all good. The bad stuff just weren't talked about much.


Granted, some misused the blessings and freedoms that God bestowed on this
country, but one cannot argue with the fact that when we truly honored God
in this country, we prospered.  As this nation and its leaders continue
to turn their back on God we will look back on the mess today and it will
seem like a trip to Disneyland.



Jim

    	re .34
    
    	Granted some things weren't good, but should we throw it all out
    	because of the bad apples?

>	And Mark, tell me now, just how is someone in a high risk group who is
>thought to have HIV (but not known) going to have someone come in and arrest
>them because they are doing some sort of harm to the children? We know for a
>fact that abuse harms children. How does HIV? You see, one is against the law,
>the other is not. Not a very good example Mark.

Endangerment is against the law.  Suppose the complaints were that the HIV
infected teacher was somehow crying, sweating, breathing, etc in the presence
of say, children with scraped knees (open wounds).  Oh, research is incomplete
and these methods of transmission are not likely, but we're talking about
UNSUBSTANTIATED RUMOR OF CRIMINAL ACTIVITY.

How does HIV harm children?  (It must be a poorly phrased question.)
It kills them if they are infected by it.

Now, I really do NOT want to turn this into discussion of HIV but to
highlight that a police raid was sanctioned by the concern of reported
abuse.  What ever happened to investigation?  But you would be safe and
pull the kiddies out and then investigate.  Okay, fine.  But the same can
be applied to rumor of any type.  And the police can come up with any
substantiation they want, just like they can pull your car off the road
anytie they want to and find something to write up. 

MM

      Hi,
    
        PEAR::SOAPBOX topics 1760 and 1771 are relevent to the issues
        of the United States government basically desecrating the
        Constitution.
    
                                                     Tony

My point, exactly Bob (.47).  Thanks.

| <<< Note 553.39 by JULIET::MORALES_NA "Sweet Spirit's Gentle Breeze" >>>



| The key is understanding what God says salvation is.  Where do you get
| your information Glen?  From an inner voice, from common sense, from
| the Bible?  From where does your knowledge of God come?

	All of the above and more.

| It's hard for one who does not believe the Bible to be inerrant to grasp onto 
| doctrines that believe it to be so.  

	If God uses stories and such as examples, as answers to questions, then
He has led you to the answer, therefor the answer you are seeking is given. He
could use a liar who is lieing right to you for the answer. So I guess that's
all I can say on that without getting set hidden.

| It feels limiting, bonding and oftimes legalistic to those who will not see 
| God has given us the plan of salvation for each human... and it's free, but it
| requires receipt of the gift.

	I don't think it is people not accepting what you wrote above that is
always the problem. I think it's the limits that we humans put on it all
sometimes that's the problem.


Glen

| <<< Note 553.40 by JULIET::MORALES_NA "Sweet Spirit's Gentle Breeze" >>>


| What does it matter, Glen?  If it is on their OWN property, there
| should be no question about it. period, imho.

	Nancy, on this I agree. But I was asking if the barrells are left on
the property or on the sidewalk. And as far as mentioning the neighborhood
groups goes, I hope you didn't think I was trying to justify the actions being
taken by saying it was the neighborhood who wants it, but just trying to give
you some insight as to who could be behind this.


Glen

RE:               <<< Note 553.50 by BIGQ::SILVA "Memories....." >>>


>	If God uses stories and such as examples, as answers to questions, then
>He has led you to the answer, therefor the answer you are seeking is given. He
>could use a liar who is lieing right to you for the answer. So I guess that's



Huh?




Jim

| <<< Note 553.43 by CSOA1::LEECH >>>


| Well, no need to continue trying to educate you on this.  You have bought into
| the lie hook, line and sinker, and you don't even realize it.

	Steve, would you agree that just in this century alone, back in the
ozzie and harriet days, that child abuse happened a lot, but we just did not
hear about it then. (but we are now)

| I'd sincerely like to know how you can prove the "it just wasn't talked
| about as much" philosophy.  It should prove fascinating.

	Answer the above question.


Glen

| <<< Note 553.45 by CSC32::J_OPPELT "Oracle-bound" >>>


| Granted some things weren't good, but should we throw it all out because of 
| the bad apples?

	Joe, how did you get that out of what I said? I merely stated that
things weren't as good as everyone makes it sound back then.



Glen

| <<< Note 553.46 by TOKNOW::METCALFE "Eschew Obfuscatory Monikers" >>>

| Endangerment is against the law.  Suppose the complaints were that the HIV
| infected teacher was somehow crying, sweating, breathing, etc in the presence
| of say, children with scraped knees (open wounds).  Oh, research is incomplete
| and these methods of transmission are not likely, but we're talking about
| UNSUBSTANTIATED RUMOR OF CRIMINAL ACTIVITY.

	Wow Mark, this is a stretch, even for you. No one can be arrested for
having the HIV virus, or even full blown AIDS. And it's funny, you mention
breathing.... good one Mark, good one. I think this comes in with ignorance on
the subject, which I didn't think you were before you wrote that. Remember,
abuse is clearly defined, your version of endangerment would not even be
touched by law enforcement officers. Try again Mark.

| Now, I really do NOT want to turn this into discussion of HIV but to highlight
| that a police raid was sanctioned by the concern of reported abuse. What ever 
| happened to investigation? But you would be safe and pull the kiddies out and 
| then investigate. Okay, fine. But the same can be applied to rumor of any type

	Well, I don't think ANY, but many. Again, it comes down to the childs
safety. While there can be many false accusations of abuse, each one should
care about the childs safety first. Like I said, it could be one of the kids
who made the claim, and it could be a get even tactic. It could be a whole host
of things. Right now we don't know. But I take it you would rather take the
chance that the abuse might not be happening and investigate first? I know Joe
said something like, "people who claimed to be christian said it did not
happen" or something like that. Why he mentioned Christian is beyond me, as I'm
sure he realizes that because someone is a Christian, it does not mean that
they can't sin. Look at all these priests. So I guess I need to ask you Mark,
is part of the reason you're so up in arms about this because the people are
Christians?



Glen

| <<< Note 553.52 by CSLALL::HENDERSON "I'm the traveller, He's the Way" >>>



| Huh?


	Jim, if you prayed to God for an answer to a question, and he used
someone who was lieing to you at the time for the answer, is it any less from
Him? 


Glen

RE:               <<< Note 553.56 by BIGQ::SILVA "Memories....." >>>



>| Huh?


>	Jim, if you prayed to God for an answer to a question, and he used
>someone who was lieing to you at the time for the answer, is it any less from
>Him? 



 Lets see if I understand this...Are you saying that God, who cannot sin,
 who has given us commandments wrt lying, would use the sin of lying to answer
 a prayer??


 If this is what you are saying, and this has happened to you, I'd do a quick
 check on just who your god is.



Jim

re: .53
    
>	Steve, would you agree that just in this century alone, back in the
>ozzie and harriet days, that child abuse happened a lot, but we just did not
>hear about it then. (but we are now)

    You still don't see it, do you?  
    
    You are using a supposition, unsubstanciated by any facts or
    statistics, to prove your theory.  By the same logic, you could also
    suppose that Jeffry Dahmer incidents were widespread in the early 30's
    (during the depression, when people didn't have enought to eat, etc.),
    but was just never reported or talked about then.  The media, being
    the unbiased friend to humanity, picks up on these societal woes and
    plasters it into all our homes via television, radio, newspaper, etc.
    Back in the 30's, there was a stigma against telling such events or
    reporting them in the media, that it just passed everyone by.
    
    
    Of course, the truth certainly could not have been that there was FAR
    LESS child abuse, wife beating, etc. in the "Ozzie and Harriet"
    days...no, it was of course a lack of 'coming forward' and reporting.
    Can't have any good connection with our root American values now, can
    we?
    
    If you can't see how this type of hearsay 'evidince' is being used to flog 
    our connection with historical values and morals, then there is little I
    can do to convince you.   It is all a necessary part of the plan to
    separate Americans from their past, because those who do not know where
    they come from don't know where they are going...and the world powers
    would certainly like to step in and point out the "right" direction.
    
    Indoctrination would not be effective if it was blunt or obvious. 
    Perhaps the dumbing down of our children via public education (thanks
    to the NEA) is part of the whole plan.  An uneducated population is
    much easier to control and convince than an educated one.  This is why
    Christian schools and homeschools are under attack now, and will
    continue to be attacked in the future.  Eventually, the government will
    control these too, and then there can be no doubt that the First
    Amendment is dead and buried (though the frogs will not notice that the
    temporature of thier bathwater just got raised again).
    
    
    -steve

| <<< Note 553.57 by CSLALL::HENDERSON "I'm the traveller, He's the Way" >>>


| Lets see if I understand this...Are you saying that God, who cannot sin, who 
| has given us commandments wrt lying, would use the sin of lying to answer a 
| prayer??

	Jim, a human, using his own free will, can be lieing to you about
anything. But the words he is speaking at the time, could be the words that God
wants you to hear. While the words themselves are not truth, they could be
Truth, if those are the words God wanted you to hear. Because maybe by seeing
the lie from the human, it could lead you to the Truth that God wants you to
know. Does this clear things up?



Glen

| <<< Note 553.58 by CSOA1::LEECH >>>


| You are using a supposition, unsubstanciated by any facts or statistics, to 
| prove your theory.  

	The facts are there Steve, by the people coming forward and talking
about the abuses they went through back then. Slavery was not exactly something
we could write home about either. And about those witches..... there is good
AND bad in ALL times. 

| By the same logic, you could also suppose that Jeffry Dahmer incidents were 
| widespread in the early 30's (during the depression, when people didn't have 
| enought to eat, etc.), but was just never reported or talked about then.  

	Gee, murder is one thing, abuse is another. While the dead can not
talk, the living can. So if it happened back then, who knows? But the abuses
DID happen, and it has been proven by the people coming forward.

| The media, being the unbiased friend to humanity, picks up on these societal 
| woes and plasters it into all our homes via television, radio, newspaper, etc.
| Back in the 30's, there was a stigma against telling such events or reporting 
| them in the media, that it just passed everyone by.

	At least you realize that things were kept quiet back then. But so many
people thought those times were so much better. It only SEEMS better because
everything was kept quiet.

| Of course, the truth certainly could not have been that there was FAR LESS 
| child abuse, wife beating, etc. in the "Ozzie and Harriet" days...no, it was 
| of course a lack of 'coming forward' and reporting.

	Who said that Steve? Not me. I DID say that everyone thought those
years were great, yet in reality they weren't as good as everyone thought, and
one of the main reasons is that people didn't talk about what others did.

| Indoctrination would not be effective if it was blunt or obvious. Perhaps the 
| dumbing down of our children via public education (thanks to the NEA) is part 
| of the whole plan.  An uneducated population is much easier to control and 
| convince than an educated one.  This is why Christian schools and homeschools 
| are under attack now, and will continue to be attacked in the future.  

	Wow... talk about being caught up in a lie..... I guess this is your
belief, so be it. I do not believe that you are seeing the whole picture, but I
don't think I can convince you. But you talk about being caught up in heresay,
not knowing what they could have meant, and then turn around and tell everyone
what the FF really wanted, meant, etc, almost as if you either have this great
insight to what they really wanted, meant, etc, or you were one of the founding
fathers.....

Glen

RE:.47 by TRLIAN::POLAND >>>
    
    
>>    I also thank the Lord that He has instilled the twenty year circle of
>>    truth in this present time.

Hi Bob,

What is this twenty year circle of truth you have mentioned?

Leslie

Same old same old

>    You still don't see it, do you?  

You're kidding, right, Steve?

The point has always been that the government will trump up a charge and
act in the name of public safety and because it is in the name of safety
for children (same as one of the excuses for raiding the WACO compound, btw)
it's okay to shoot first and ask questions later.  I am surprised that Glen
would advocate such a thing given his propensity to charge Christians with
prejudging certain advocacy groups, and the gall to suggest that >I'm< the
one who is reacting to this because the group is [reportedly] a bunch of 
Christians (.55) since it seems more appropriate that >his< duplicity is borne
from that very fact.  (After all, everyone knows that Christians discipline
their children and OFTEN ABUSE their children, first with spanking and
then with mind control.  In the name of safety for the children, we need
to save these kids from their parents.)

The arguments are ludicrous, and the reptitive drone is very tiresome.
See note 157.107.

Mark

P.S.  As for trumping up charges and acting in the name of public safety:

Luke 23:2  And they began to accuse him, saying, We found this fellow
perverting the nation, and forbidding to give tribute to Caesar, saying that
he himself is Christ a King.
  5  And they were the more fierce, saying, He stirreth up the people,
teaching throughout all Jewry, beginning from Galilee to this place.
 10  And the chief priests and scribes stood and vehemently accused him.
 23  And they were instant with loud voices, requiring that he might be
crucified. And the voices of them and of the chief priests prevailed.
 24  And Pilate gave sentence that it should be as they required.

Yes, let us act first in the name of safety, children, and apple pie
and forget investigating the charges.  Even Pilate found no basis to
the charges, but because of the mob, we know that groundless accusations
don't matter, just as long as people are alarmed, ... or simply offended.

MM

    	re .56
    
    	If [concocted situation] then bugcheck.

  Re : "Twenty year circle of truth"

  Hmm, I guess JFK assasination disclosure is a little overdue.

I also believe there are cycles, though I haven't pinned a number to it.
And I think Bob's number is a loose observation anyway and not dogma.
Having said that, anyone remember the axiom that says, "those who do not
remember the past are doom to relive it"?  This has all-too-frequently
been a recurring prophecy.

MM

 RE .59


 see .52 and/or 1 Cor 2:14.




Jim

� Having said that, anyone remember the axiom that says, "those who do not
� remember the past are doom to relive it"?

I do.   Generally with 'the past' replaced by 'history'.

							Andrew

      re: .58
    
      Hi Steve,
    
        Your contributions here and in soapbox on this matter have
        not been unnoticed by me.  Ultimately Satan is pulling the
        strings and the forces are very high up.  It is a worldwide
        conspiracy.
    
        Before the world can wonder after the beast, there must be
        some significant 'dissolving' of nationalism.  There must 
        be a new world order and a commonality among nations that
        pure constitutional rule would never tolerate.
    
        Thus the Constitution must be abolished (at least in practise).
    
        Thanks brother.
    
                                                 Tony

| <<< Note 553.63 by TOKNOW::METCALFE "Eschew Obfuscatory Monikers" >>>




| I am surprised that Glen would advocate such a thing given his propensity to 
| charge Christians with prejudging certain advocacy groups, and the gall to 
| suggest that >I'm< the one who is reacting to this because the group is 
| [reportedly] a bunch of Christians (.55) since it seems more appropriate that 
| >his< duplicity is borne from that very fact.  

	Hmmm.... Mark, is there a difference between prejudging a group that is
doing absolutely nothing wrong, but just has a different belief system than you
and a group that might be abusing kids? The answer is yes, and there is your
difference. In this case, one is based on a report that someone claimed abuse
was happening. The other is based on one's beliefs. 

| (After all, everyone knows that Christians discipline their children and OFTEN
| ABUSE their children, first with spanking and then with mind control.  In the 
| name of safety for the children, we need to save these kids from their parents

	You know Mark, when you go off on these little tirades of yours, you
become very belligerent. I can't for the life of me figure out how you got the
above analogy. Maybe you're one to believe that because the person claims they
are Christian, that they should be given the benefit of the doubt. To me it
does not matter if the person is Christian or not, even if it were my own
pastor. If an abuse claim has been made, then the children's safety has to come
first. Again I ask you, if you heard an abuse claim at a place where your child
was, would you take your child out of the place or hope that the investigation
shows no wrong doing, which could leave your child open for possible harm?
Also, if the place were a Christian one, would that affect your decision?

| The arguments are ludicrous, and the repetitive drone is very tiresome.

	Then perhaps you stick to what's being talked about and stop making it
into a ludicrous repetitive drone?


Glen

	.73
    
>	Hmmm.... Mark, is there a difference between prejudging a group that is
>doing absolutely nothing wrong, but just has a different belief system than you
>and a group that might be abusing kids? 
    
    	Prejudging a group that **MIGHT** be doing something wrong?
    
    	You are saying that this is good?
    
    	It sounds to me from your posting here that you are already 
    	convinced that the abuse was occurring.  If that is not true,
    	perhaps you might want to be a little more clear on that point.

    Let's see if I have this right.
    
    
    Prejudging a person because he is accused of *possibly* spreading a disease 
    to innocent children is bad.
    
    Prejudging a group that is accused of *possibly* abusing children is good.
    
    
    Fine logic, that.  I am impressed.
    
    
    -steve

| <<< Note 553.74 by CSC32::J_OPPELT "Oracle-bound" >>>

| >	Hmmm.... Mark, is there a difference between prejudging a group that is
| >doing absolutely nothing wrong, but just has a different belief system than you
| >and a group that might be abusing kids?

| Prejudging a group that **MIGHT** be doing something wrong? You are saying 
| that this is good?

	Let's see, if someone says Jonny is picking his nose, then no. But if
someone makes the claim that kids are being abused, then the kids should be
taken out until it is discovered that the place is ok. The kids had to be taken
out anyway in this case as the school was not supposed to be operating. 

| It sounds to me from your posting here that you are already convinced that the
| abuse was occurring.  

	Well Joe, that is not correct. 



Glen

| <<< Note 553.75 by CSOA1::LEECH "annuit coeptis novus ordo seclorum" >>>



| Prejudging a person because he is accused of *possibly* spreading a disease to
| innocent children is bad.

	It can't happen unless the child is abused.

| Prejudging a group that is accused of *possibly* abusing children is good.

	The child could be abused.


Glen

    Since when is breathing on an open wound considered abuse? (this was
    the example given in a previous note)
     
    I'll await an answer to my previous question. 

| <<< Note 553.78 by CSOA1::LEECH "annuit coeptis novus ordo seclorum" >>>


| Since when is breathing on an open wound considered abuse? (this was the 
| example given in a previous note)

	And since when is breathing in an open wound considered dangerous. We
know abuse will hurt, and we know breathing on an open wound will do no harm.

| I'll await an answer to my previous question.

	My answer stands.


Glen

    HIV is spread by bodily fluids.  Breathing (transmission of air with
    bodily fluids) on an open wound may be viewed as dangerous to some.
    
    I still await your answer.
    
    -steve

| <<< Note 553.80 by CSOA1::LEECH "annuit coeptis novus ordo seclorum" >>>



| HIV is spread by bodily fluids.  Breathing (transmission of air with bodily 
| fluids) on an open wound may be viewed as dangerous to some.


	But in reality, in EVERY single case, it is not dangerous. When abuse
is a claim, then reality of today dictates that the children be taken out of
the school to ensure harm does not come to them. Remember, in this case a claim
would be made, then the police react. In the case of breathing, the claim can
be made, but the reality of the situation would show that the claim is wrong,
every time. I stand by my answer.


Glen

>	But in reality, in EVERY single case, it is not dangerous. When abuse
>is a claim, then reality of today dictates that the children be taken out of
>Remember, in this case a claim would be made, then the police react. In the case of breathing, the claim can
>be made, but the reality of the situation would show that the claim is wrong,
>every time. 

Duplicity.  You have no proof that it is not dangerous.  And proof isn't
the issue here.  It is a false accusation.  You're advocating a "shoot first"
response in any claim of abuse.  I ask what you'd advocate in response to 
the claim of the spread of HIV from teacher to child?  The claim doesn't
HAVE to be valid; it only needs to be made.  Will you wait until the tests
come back from Johnny's doctor to show that Johnny did not get HIV from the
teacher?  Or will you take your children out to protect the child.

Same thing.

>I stand by my answer.

Not surprised.

    	re .76
    
    	Why do *YOU* get to pick and choose for us what is to be considered
    	serious enough to warrant pulling the kids out of school?

    Heard on the Radio TODAY!
    
    160 MILLION teens stay home from school each out of fear for their
    lives.

re .84

Where?

There aren't that many teenagers in the whole United States!

/john

    Maybe it's North America?

    It may be students of all ages, but the "commercial" that pre-empted
    the statistics were teens.  It spoke from the view of a fearful student
    who knows that his classmate is carrying.  It says he's heard of metal
    detectors but there are none present now and he's fearful for his life,
    better keep his mouth shut and not talk to anyone because he wouldn't
    be the first kid to die from a gun or stab wound.
    
    Pretty powerful "infomerical" if you will.
    
    

My guess from the statistic quoted is that 160 million days of school are
missed by teens for fear of their lives.  Now if someone stays out of school
for the whole year, attributing it to fear, that's 180 days for one person.
Further, it could be "staying out of public school" which wouldn't mean that
the person is missing school if they are missing public schools to go to 
private schools.

160 million is a very high number.  The United States only has 260 million
people of all ages (maybe 275M).  The statistic needs to be examined more 
closely.

MM

| <<< Note 553.82 by TOKNOW::METCALFE "Eschew Obfuscatory Monikers" >>>



| Duplicity.  You have no proof that it is not dangerous.  

	Go read a few CDC reports and get back to me.

| And proof isn't the issue here. It is a false accusation.  

	One, the HIV case, is accusing someone of harming another over
something that is not against the law. The abuse case is accusing another over
something that IS against the law. Apples and oranges Mark. 

| I ask what you'd advocate in response to the claim of the spread of HIV from 
| teacher to child?  

	Education.

| The claim doesn't HAVE to be valid; it only needs to be made.  

	I could claim that so and so gave me cancer. It ain't gonna do me any
good as it is a claim that is one, not against the law, and two, medically
impossible. The same applies to your breathing on a child.

| Will you wait until the tests come back from Johnny's doctor to show that 
| Johnny did not get HIV from the teacher?  Or will you take your children out 
| to protect the child.

	Mark, it is up to the parents to decide what they would want to do. But
you will NEVER see law enforcement people storming a school because someone
made a claim that a teacher is HIV+ and breathed on a student. Apples and
oranges.



Glen

| <<< Note 553.83 by CSC32::J_OPPELT "Oracle-bound" >>>


| Why do *YOU* get to pick and choose for us what is to be considered serious 
| enough to warrant pulling the kids out of school?

	Joe, YOU pull YOUR kids out of school when YOU feel it is right. We
were talking about claims and law enforcement. 


Glen

>	Joe, YOU pull YOUR kids out of school when YOU feel it is right. We
>were talking about claims and law enforcement. 

	I *HAVE* pulled my kids out.  My wife and I just will not allow
    	them to be polluted by the godless -- actually anti-god -- 
    	brainwashing that the liberal, humanistic, sin-encouraging
    	school system crams upon society's kids today.
    
    	Will our home school be raided too?
    
    	As for what "we were talking about", you were just bugchecking
    	again.

| <<< Note 553.91 by CSC32::J_OPPELT "Oracle-bound" >>>

| >	Joe, YOU pull YOUR kids out of school when YOU feel it is right. We
| >were talking about claims and law enforcement.

| I *HAVE* pulled my kids out.  My wife and I just will not allow
| them to be polluted by the godless -- actually anti-god --
| brainwashing that the liberal, humanistic, sin-encouraging
| school system crams upon society's kids today.

	That's your choice. Hopefully your kids will receive a good education.

| Will our home school be raided too?

	There are standards for home schools, right? Abuse I would imagine
isn't one of them. If claims were made, and they chose to hit your home during
school hours, then yeah, I guess it could happen.

| As for what "we were talking about", you were just bugchecking
| again.

	Uh huh... ok Joe, whatever you say.



Glen

    Well here it is without the inadvertent mention of a no-no topic.
    
    
    It seems most of the previous replies were in response to one person
    who had little worth to his arguments. So why bother.
    Many were also entirely off topic.
    
    Steve - you tell them!
    
    We have been sold that big government is the answer. WRONG!  Local
    government and elders should be the only authorities involved in such a
    case.  They know the people - they know the children.  The county, the
    state and the Fed should mind its own business.  In the days of our FF
    something was only elevated above the local level in rare
    circumstances.
    
    THEY ARE NOT THE GOVERNMENTS CHILDREN even though it continually tries
    to assume ownership(birth and marriage certificates do not help us)
    
    Did it used to be different?  Anyone that has not been totally blinded
    knows that things are worse now.  We don't have to go back to the 18th
    century for examples when the records (or lack of them) is more
    arguable.  Go back to the fifties.  The number one complaints of
    teachers was chewing gum and talking in class etc.  Not listed were
    teen pregnancies, handguns, gang violence etc. etc.  If your going to
    argue something don't waste time with complete illegitimacies.
    
    There are the force of those who wish to establish a kingdom on earth
    without God battling against those who wish to establish it by God's
    word.  That is the bottom line.  These government Christian conflicts
    have nothing to do with drugs(like charged in Waco), guns(like charged
    with Randy Weaver), taxes(like charged with Gordon Kahl), with not
    filing as a political action committee(like the Laporte Church of
    Christ & Pete Peters when it successfully led the defeat of an antichrist- 
    ian  bill), homeschooling or any of a hundred other charges.  It is a
    struggle by the government who know that the Christian way of life(true
    Christianity) is incompatible with it and its goals.  A sort of - this
    country ain't big enough for the both of us, so the government is
    beginning to remove the opposition.  
    
    There is one thing I find beautiful about this destruction of this
    beloved country that my forefathers have fought for for 13 generations
    - and it is this.  People are going to have to take sides soon.  This
    nation must either wholly fall or wholly repent.  There will be no more
    fence sitting - and this goes especially for so many Christians who
    have been beleiving the lies the media tells.  One day your going to
    find yourself here(not raptured) and you are going to see that you are
    now the one being labeled as the cult and the enemy of society and
    progress.  Well now that I think of it "officially" you have already
    been labeled as such.  It will just be a matter of time before they
    make it more palatable to the masses.  
    
    May God be merciful in either our repentance or fall.
    
    In His Service,
    
    Rich
    
    
    

    You better watch those kinds of notes, Rich...you may get labelled as a
    conspiracy nut, like me.  8^)
    
    Just remember that it can't happen here and all will be well.   8^)

	John Leffler had an impromptu phone chat at the end of his radio
show about a week ago with the school's director.  It was a Department
of Socal Services operation, with 15 armed County Sheriff's deputies along
for the raid.  They broke down the door to his home and took anything they
wanted, but this isn't what he's upset about.  They found two kids at the
school, rounded up several others at the church, took the lot of them to
social services, offered them cigarettes, and gave them all humiliating
and intrusive physical exams.  The director is confident that the school
will reopen soon.