Jump to content
Forums forums
PRIMETIMER
Cranberry

20/20

Recommended Posts


Didn't the mother seem "off" aside from her batshit crazy parenting skills? I can't even begin to express my disgust at this family. The kid walking away from the accident really showed his character. I was really disappointed in the one family for dropping it in the end, wish they had held out for their day in court. Also disappointed in how quickly the show wrapped up after that, I felt like there was a lot more story to tell.

Curious that the one victim wasn't named or portrayed in any way.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

Curious that the one victim wasn't named or portrayed in any way.

 

 

That would be the driver of the white SUV, right? It's curious how she (she?) ended up on the side of the road, it was said she spun out, right? Then someone mentioned a flat tire, right? But no more was said about that person or vehicle. Was a repair vehicle called? Yes, some unanswered questions. I wonder if that family was left alone since it could be held responsible for the deaths, meaning if that SUV hadn't been there, neither would any of the people.

 

Wow, Walnut, great links. Thanks. From the CBS News link:

 

"When you have someone who is not an officer stating that they are, it can cause issues," said Bauman. "It's a concern."

 

Well, no sh*t Sherlock, as they say. Could that quote be any more stupid?

 

The Mail link makes me think this killer kid's problem is not wealth, it's a hereditary lack of brain cells and morals.

Edited by saber5055
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

I am wondering how Cleburne Metal Works is getting government work.  Their website lists multiple projects done for various Cities and ISDs.  Those public entities must not have procurement policies that include criminal background checks.

Edited by ToukieSmith
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Kids who had actual terrible childhoods, who witnessed and experienced horrific things, that go on to commit crimes have the book thrown at them and are buried under the prison.  Screw Ethan Couch, his shitty parents and that a-hole judge.

  • Like 10

Share this post


Link to post

I am wondering how Cleburne Metal Works is getting government work.

It either bids low to get the contract, low-balling other competitors, or someone on the gov contract-selection payroll gets something ($$) in his/her pocket if Cleburne gets the contract. I'll put my money on the second option.

Those public entities must not have procurement policies that include criminal background checks.

Government contracts are based on bottom-line price alone. They can be manipulated, however, so cronies get the contracts. Just ask me ... I used to bid them and finally quit, it was so convoluted and crooked.

Kids who had actual terrible childhoods, who witnessed and experienced horrific things, that go on to commit crimes have the book thrown at them and are buried under the prison.

Do you mean like that African-American kid the judge (who let the rich-kid killer walk free) had tossed into prison? (Story in the Mail link above.)

Edited by saber5055
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

That Ethan kid is Joan Van Der Sloot 3.0 (I say 3.0 because IMO George Zimmerman is 2.0)

 

That's when I realized people were judging Simpson on a "us-vs.-them" meter. Didn't matter if he was a double murderer, he was black so should get off. That thinking boggled my mind. It still boggles me today. I can't comprehend it. Nor can I think that way.

 

 

Here's the thing.  What boggled a lot of people's minds in 1993 was that a jury in Simi Valley saw a bunch of police officers beat the shit out of Rodney King and the jury was like, "no problem."  It boggles my mind today that a grand jury saw Eric Garner choked by a police officer (even though that was an illegal move) and said, "no problem."  

 

As for OJ, I was a grown woman when it happened (Nicole Brown Simpson and I were born in the same year), and I had a feeling he did it when I first heard about it.  The problem was the prosecution's theory wasn't believable.  I alway felt he killed Nicole first, Ron Goldman came upon her body, at that time people didn't have cell phones, so maybe he wanted to go for help and that's when OJ killed him.  I believe the prosecution tried to say that OJ killed them both at the same time, which sounded stupid to me.   Also the case was lost because a lot of the physical evidence was destroyed; even Dr. Michael Baden felt the crime scene was compromised because so many people walked in and out of there without foot coverings.   Also Mark Fuhrman walked right into that mess, the prosecution never should have put him on the stand, the LAPD had to have known he was compromised.  The way I saw the trial was that the LAPD tried to frame a guilty man.  

Edited by Neurochick
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

That Ethan kid is Joan Van Der Sloot 3.0 (I say 3.0 because IMO George Zimmerman is 2.0)

 

 

Here's the thing.  What boggled a lot of people's minds in 1993 was that a jury in Simi Valley saw a bunch of police officers beat the shit out of Rodney King and the jury was like, "no problem."  It boggles my mind today that a grand jury saw Eric Garner choked by a police officer (even though that was an illegal move) and said, "no problem."  

 

As for OJ, I was a grown woman when it happened (Nicole Brown Simpson and I were born in the same year), and I had a feeling he did it when I first heard about it.  The problem was the prosecution's theory wasn't believable.  I alway felt he killed Nicole first, Ron Goldman came upon her body, at that time people didn't have cell phones, so maybe he wanted to go for help and that's when OJ killed him.  I believe the prosecution tried to say that OJ killed them both at the same time, which sounded stupid to me.   Also the case was lost because a lot of the physical evidence was destroyed; even Dr. Michael Baden felt the crime scene was compromised because so many people walked in and out of there without foot coverings.   Also Mark Fuhrman walked right into that mess, the prosecution never should have put him on the stand, the LAPD had to have known he was compromised.  The way I saw the trial was that the LAPD tried to frame a guilty man.  

 

This.  I thought OJ was guilty too and I always thought LAPD framed OJ for the murders to prevent him from getting away with it.  It did not help that the Rampart division of LAPD was running amok which helped the public believe that the police would plant evidence.

 

I also agree with your comments about Ethan being Joran Van Der Sloot 3.0.  Ethan will run afoul of the law again.  I just hope no innocent people die when he does.  The same goes for George Zimmerman.

Edited by ToukieSmith
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
As for OJ, I was a grown woman when it happened (Nicole Brown Simpson and I were born in the same year), and I had a feeling he did it when I first heard about it.  The problem was the prosecution's theory wasn't believable.  I alway felt he killed Nicole first, Ron Goldman came upon her body, at that time people didn't have cell phones, so maybe he wanted to go for help and that's when OJ killed him.  I believe the prosecution tried to say that OJ killed them both at the same time, which sounded stupid to me.   Also the case was lost because a lot of the physical evidence was destroyed; even Dr. Michael Baden felt the crime scene was compromised because so many people walked in and out of there without foot coverings.   Also Mark Fuhrman walked right into that mess, the prosecution never should have put him on the stand, the LAPD had to have known he was compromised.  The way I saw the trial was that the LAPD tried to frame a guilty man.

 

 

I respectfully disagree.  The LAPD knew who Simpson was, not just because of his record with the domestic calls, but also because they had coddled him.  He invited officers over to swim in his pool, have drinks, hang out.  Fuhrman, Vannatter and Lange had never worked a case together before and they had no idea where Simpson was that night.  It would make no sense to frame him given the above.  And why would they frame him?  Remember, at the time of the murders the general public as a whole still saw Simpson as a football hero and bumbling comedic actor.  His true character was known by very few.

 

As far as the prosecution not putting Fuhrman on the stand, they had no choice.  Fuhrman was a responding detective and discovered one of the bloody gloves.  Ito should not have allowed the tapes into evidence as the case had zero to do with race.  That said, the prosecution should not have run screaming from Fuhrman.  They should have demonstrated how difficult, if not impossible, it would have been for these three officers to conspire to frame Simpson and mention Fuhrman's record as a detective. 

 

I don't believe that Nicole and Ron were killed at the same time; I'm not sure that I remember the prosecution thought that.  I do believe they were killed within minutes of each other so maybe at the same time but not at EXACTLY the same time.  I too think Simpson killed Nicole and Ron had the unfortunate luck to walk up her sidewalk at that time.  I think Simpson hid, Ron went to Nicole, got down on a knee to help her and that's when Simpson came out and delivered the first (and probably fatal) wound to the side of his neck. 

 

Was physical evidence destroyed?  What physical evidence?  As I recall hearing, the physical evidence was pretty solid.

 

I did not watch the case on Ethan Couch but reading the posts here . . . it makes me stabby.  So very sad that his parents apparently taught him that he needs to have no responsibility for anything.  Those parents should have been tried and convicted too because it seems they are just as guilty as if they had been behind the wheel.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post

I respectfully disagree.  The LAPD knew who Simpson was, not just because of his record with the domestic calls, but also because they had coddled him.  He invited officers over to swim in his pool, have drinks, hang out.  Fuhrman, Vannatter and Lange had never worked a case together before and they had no idea where Simpson was that night.  It would make no sense to frame him given the above.  And why would they frame him?  Remember, at the time of the murders the general public as a whole still saw Simpson as a football hero and bumbling comedic actor.  His true character was known by very few.

 

As far as the prosecution not putting Fuhrman on the stand, they had no choice.  Fuhrman was a responding detective and discovered one of the bloody gloves.  Ito should not have allowed the tapes into evidence as the case had zero to do with race.  That said, the prosecution should not have run screaming from Fuhrman.  They should have demonstrated how difficult, if not impossible, it would have been for these three officers to conspire to frame Simpson and mention Fuhrman's record as a detective. 

 

I don't believe that Nicole and Ron were killed at the same time; I'm not sure that I remember the prosecution thought that.  I do believe they were killed within minutes of each other so maybe at the same time but not at EXACTLY the same time.  I too think Simpson killed Nicole and Ron had the unfortunate luck to walk up her sidewalk at that time.  I think Simpson hid, Ron went to Nicole, got down on a knee to help her and that's when Simpson came out and delivered the first (and probably fatal) wound to the side of his neck. 

 

Was physical evidence destroyed?  What physical evidence?  As I recall hearing, the physical evidence was pretty solid.

 

I did not watch the case on Ethan Couch but reading the posts here . . . it makes me stabby.  So very sad that his parents apparently taught him that he needs to have no responsibility for anything.  Those parents should have been tried and convicted too because it seems they are just as guilty as if they had been behind the wheel.

 

 

THIS ^^^^

 

I was going to say the same, but u already said it. YES.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

Watched the episode with the Arkansas politician and the 3 little girls.  Holy shit!  I fell asleep before I found out how they got rid of the 2 girls.  Anyone?  The husband looked a bit off like he was transgender (not that being transgender is off).  The wife said they kept their "own" boys with them at night just sets it all up doesn't it?

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

They did a custody transfer to a family they knew who had other adopted children. The husband turned out to be a pedophile and sexually abused the girls.

This whole thing was a disaster from the start. Hubby clearly used his political influence to make the adoptions go through. They erroneously believed their child development degrees made them experts in dealing with severely neglected and traumatized children. The State placed three girls with a history of sexual abuse in a household that was predominantly male. I mean, the screw-ups were just endless.

I have nothing against religion, but even the couple at the end weirded me out. When the little girl said she hoped other orphans would be placed with "Godly families" I was like, WTF?! She sounded brainwashed to me.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

Watched the episode with the Arkansas politician and the 3 little girls.  Holy shit!  I fell asleep before I found out how they got rid of the 2 girls.  Anyone?  The husband looked a bit off like he was transgender (not that being transgender is off).  The wife said they kept their "own" boys with them at night just sets it all up doesn't it?

 

http://abcnews.go.com/US/young-girls-arkansas-state-official-center-adoption-controversy/story?id=34636997

 

Upshot is that the Harris's got off scot-free and are still whining that people don't like them because they're so much more Godly than everyone else.  The two younger girls were given to another family where one of them was promptly sexually abused by the husband.  He's currently serving 40 years for his crimes.  The oldest girl was adopted by a family who didn't participate in the show, but it's assumed that she's doing well.  The two youngest girls were adopted by another family, and now live in a sparkly, princess-ey girly girl paradise.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

Thank God for the happy ending, I only hope that eventually all three girls will get to connect and have a relationship of some kind.

Something about the Harris's just turned me off all the way through. They were obviously not equipped from day one to deal with the adopted children with any kind of special needs and immediately drew the line between their biological children (OUR children) and the adopted children by putting the boys in their own bedroom and just the way they talked about the differences.

If anything good came from this story, it's that the re-homing practice is now a felony in Arkansas along with five other states. Should be all fifty states in a world that makes sense and should apply to animals in some way too if you ask me. Anyone who just freely takes in kids and animals from Craig's list and the like can't possibly be up to any good when there are much more legitimate ways to adopt living creatures.

Edited by mansonlamps
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

Harris' connection to Josh Duggar just creeps me out. Plus that picture of him kissing the little girl was so inappropriate for a

child that has suffered sexual abuse IMO.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

Wow. This "adoption" started with a meeting in a darkened church parking lot. Really? It would have been nice for ABC to drill down on that fact and a few others, such as why the Harrises were in such a rush to make this happen after being told it was not a great idea and they didn't have the background to deal with little girls who had been subject to such terrible abuse. They really glossed over the fact that Harris added a photo including the eldest girl on his campaign literature as well, only removing it when he was told it was illegal. The Twitter "adoption announcement" was a nice touch. ;-(

 

There's something wrong with the Harrises. I'm sure most here can figure out what that might be. And I wonder who the "anonymous tipster" was as well; somehow I'm thinking it might have been the babysitter.

  • Like 9

Share this post


Link to post

There's something wrong with the Harrises. I'm sure most here can figure out what that might be.

 

Gee, I wonder if believing that demons inhabit your child is ONE of the things wrong with the Harrises ...

Edited by walnutqueen
  • Like 9

Share this post


Link to post

It's very disturbing what happened to these 3 little girls. They had the odds against them from birth. I hope they all get deep therapy and go forward to live happy and healthy lives. It boggles my mind that people who abuse animals receive harsher punishments and face more severe social repercussions than people who physically and emotionally abuse children.

I think many states' DHS or Family Services dpts are overwhelmed and under educated on dealing with the number of cases. The Arkansas DHS was wrong from the jump to let the Harrises take on those poor little girls. They had the authority to get them placed in more appropriate home(s). Because of their error, those girls suffered unnecessary additional trauma. If they had attachment disorder before, I can't imagine how the "re-homing"in yet another abusive home further screwed up the psyches of those kids.

I think the Harrises are deplorable people. Hiding behind their Bible doesn't absolve them. They thought their Godliness put them above everyone else but their selfish and prideful decisions caused a lot of pain for those kids.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post

This story really enraged me. Can you picture these people? They were cowering with their three half-grown sons, locked in the master bedroom. Meanwhile, a demonically possessed toddler plots telepathically with the baby to kill them.

Notice that they claimed they had no choice but to get rid of their girls to protect those three boys - each weighing at least one hundred pounds. But they were fine re-homing (abandoning) the two girls to a family with children. I can't help but think it was because the children in the second home were adopted, therefore less than, and less deserving of safety.

The former foster mother clearly despised the Harris family and their extremist beliefs, even though she had strong religious beliefs herself.

I also noticed the Harris mother never shed a tear. Not when discussing how damaged the girls were, not when discussing getting rid of the girls, not when talking about handing vulnerable pre-schoolers to a pedophile. Cold as ice. He cried a lot, of course only when discussing HIS suffering. I hope their day care is boycotted to the point of shutting down.

Finally, why are adoptive children considered inferior and less-than compared to biological children? The Harrises should be punished exactly the same way they would have if abandoning their bio children.

  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post

That Hideous Harris family In addition to the insanity they put those vulnerable helpless innocent girls through All of them are so huge. Why??? In all their godliness are they skipping over the 7 deadly sin part?

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

Kathryn Joyce wrote a book - The Child Catchers - on adoption in the evangelical community that I think explains part of this.  Adoption has been pushed hard in that community as a new christian outreach for converting people to become evangelical christians. A lot of it has been directed at third world children but not all of it. And it has been pushed hard in church pulpits.  And some of the stories are just heartbreaking. Older children who aren't raised from birth in strict homes come into them and are less submissive and obedient than the parents' natural children are treated harshly and sometimes rejected outight and abandoned to rehoming or if old enough, the streets. There is just such a push for people to adopt who aren't prepared for it or even really committed to loving the children as their own or who shouldn't have the kids they produced themselves much less adopt others.  I think this happens because the motivation isn't -- for some of them, not everyone -- giving a child a loving home but raising them for Christ and converting them and doing 'good deeds' etc. I think that's how you get the immediate separating between 'our kids' and the 'new kids' and how that never really translated into those little girls being a true part of that family. Kids are smart and intuitive and I think they reacted to that basic fact and could not trust the Harrises. The Harrises never really trusted or loved the girls for themselves. They were a mission field. And the Harrises don't seem to understand what they did or why it went wrong. They are completely oblivious. The couple who finally adopted the two youngest seem to have done so for the right reasons and are getting a much different outcome for it. Kids know when they are loved and when they are a 'project' walking on eggshells in order to be accepted.  

 

This whole case has enraged me since I first heard about it. The Harrises feel so sorry for themselves and have no insight into their behavior at all. They think they are being persecuted for their faith.  No, they are being censured for their stupidity and lack of judgment.  

Edited by Andyourlittledog2
  • Like 16

Share this post


Link to post

OMG I do not even know what to say to convey my rage for that horrible "Godly" Harris family. I have no words.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post

And by all means, keep your "real" sons away from the demon children. GACK


Forgive my language, but what the fuck? Someone has to jump through all kinds of hoops and whatnots to adopt a child, but if they find the child unacceptable to them... they can just RE HOME the child and pass her off to who the hell-ever? WHAT?

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post

Kathryn Joyce wrote a book - The Child Catchers - on adoption in the evangelical community that I think explains part of this.  Adoption has been pushed hard in that community as a new christian outreach for converting people to become evangelical christians. A lot of it has been directed at third world children but not all of it. And it has been pushed hard in church pulpits.  And some of the stories are just heartbreaking. Older children who aren't raised from birth in strict homes come into them and are less submissive and obedient than the parents' natural children are treated harshly and sometimes rejected outight and abandoned to rehoming or if old enough, the streets. There is just such a push for people to adopt who aren't prepared for it or even really committed to loving the children as their own or who shouldn't have the kids they produced themselves much less adopt others.  I think this happens because the motivation isn't -- for some of them, not everyone -- giving a child a loving home but raising them for Christ and converting them and doing 'good deeds' etc. I think that's how you get the immediate separating between 'our kids' and the 'new kids' and how that never really translated into those little girls being a true part of that family. Kids are smart and intuitive and I think they reacted to that basic fact and could not trust the Harrises. The Harrises never really trusted or loved the girls for themselves. They were a mission field. And the Harrises don't seem to understand what they did or why it went wrong. They are completely oblivious. The couple who finally adopted the two youngest seem to have done so for the right reasons and are getting a much different outcome for it. Kids know when they are loved and when they are a 'project' walking on eggshells in order to be accepted.  

 

This whole case has enraged me since I first heard about it. The Harrises feel so sorry for themselves and have no insight into their behavior at all. They think they are being persecuted for their faith.  No, they are being censured for their stupidity and lack of judgment.

I haven't read that book, but it reminds me of all the talk when the Duggars pretended they might adopt. It was said that Gothard taught that the sins of the father are visited on the child. If the Harrises believe that way it would explain how they treated the children from the beginning. Motion sensors and video cameras, and hiding the sons in their bedroom. What did they think they were teaching the boys about their new sisters?

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

I think it's hard to judge unless you're in that situation. My in-laws have done foster care for years and had a seven year-old who was incredibly violent. She snuck into the room of another foster in the middle of the night, wrapped an extension cord around her neck and began choking her. She was moved to a residential treatment facility the next day. It sounds callous, but you have to be a little wary when dealing with those types of kids. The Harris family still went about everything the wrong way and deserves every bit of criticism they get, but I don't fault them for being overly cautious.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

That breaks my heart. My granddaughter is 7 and is the sweetest, happiest kid.

What kind of horrors must that poor baby have gone through to do something like that at such a young age. BitterApple, that's the saddest thing I've read in a long time.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

That breaks my heart. My granddaughter is 7 and is the sweetest, happiest kid.

What kind of horrors must that poor baby have gone through to do something like that at such a young age. BitterApple, that's the saddest thing I've read in a long time.

I know, it's heartbreaking. The girl had three siblings who were able to be adopted together, but she had to remain in State custody due to her behavioral issues.

To make things even more depressing, I read that the birth mother of the Harris girls went on to have two more children. *sigh*

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

But didn't the Harris' start treating the girls differently BEFORE they ever started acting out?  And why couldn't they just let the boys lock their bedroom door as opposed to making a big ordeal out of moving the sons into the "safety" of the parents' room?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

And by all means, keep your "real" sons away from the demon children. GACK

Forgive my language, but what the fuck? Someone has to jump through all kinds of hoops and whatnots to adopt a child, but if they find the child unacceptable to them... they can just RE HOME the child and pass her off to who the hell-ever? WHAT?

Unbelievable!

Didn't Ellen get in all kinds of trouble for re-homing a PUPPY??

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

The Harris's adopted those girls for one reason only, his political career.

"Look at us, we're a perfect family with three boys and three girls," is what he wanted to convey to his supporters.

Edited by Neurochick
  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post

20/20 is a pathetic excuse for a "news" show.  It was incredible that they could so completely fail in their jobs as journalists in the 3 I watched which were OJ, the kid who killed 4 due to being spoiled, and the Harris case.  There were glaring holes in all three, more questions the viewers were left asking than were ever answered.  This show should get the Razzie of the Year award.  I'd like to see them yanked off the air for such shoddy and incomplete practices.  I do think ABC should be hearing from all of us.  I'd like a copy of their mission statement for this show and a statement explaining how it was met or failed to meet their goals.  We viewers could and would do a much superior job.

Edited by Micks Picks
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

I'm from Arkansas, and this case was all over the news. The Arkansas Times led the investigation into the Harrises, and weren't exactly happy with 20/20.

http://www.arktimes.com/ArkansasBlog/archives/2015/10/24/twenty-problems-with-20-20s-coverage-of-the-justin-harris-rehoming

wow wow wow. Unbelievable. My husband and I watched this together. I will be sure to discuss it with him. Thank you for sharing.

Share this post


Link to post

Kathryn Joyce wrote a book - The Child Catchers - on adoption in the evangelical community that I think explains part of this. Adoption has been pushed hard in that community as a new christian outreach for converting people to become evangelical christians. A lot of it has been directed at third world children but not all of it. And it has been pushed hard in church pulpits. And some of the stories are just heartbreaking. Older children who aren't raised from birth in strict homes come into them and are less submissive and obedient than the parents' natural children are treated harshly and sometimes rejected outight and abandoned to rehoming or if old enough, the streets. There is just such a push for people to adopt who aren't prepared for it or even really committed to loving the children as their own or who shouldn't have the kids they produced themselves much less adopt others. I think this happens because the motivation isn't -- for some of them, not everyone -- giving a child a loving home but raising them for Christ and converting them and doing 'good deeds' etc. I think that's how you get the immediate separating between 'our kids' and the 'new kids' and how that never really translated into those little girls being a true part of that family. Kids are smart and intuitive and I think they reacted to that basic fact and could not trust the Harrises. The Harrises never really trusted or loved the girls for themselves. They were a mission field. And the Harrises don't seem to understand what they did or why it went wrong. They are completely oblivious. The couple who finally adopted the two youngest seem to have done so for the right reasons and are getting a much different outcome for it. Kids know when they are loved and when they are a 'project' walking on eggshells in order to be accepted.

This whole case has enraged me since I first heard about it. The Harrises feel so sorry for themselves and have no insight into their behavior at all. They think they are being persecuted for their faith. No, they are being censured for their stupidity and lack of judgment.

Exactly. I hate how churches encourage to adopt orphans but don't tell them the hardships. You can't pray trauma away

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

Did that Harris husband remind anyone else of 'Pat' from years ago SNL? Just me?.........Ok then

Edited by Dahlia
  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post

Did that Harris husband remind anyone else of 'Pat' from years ago SNL? Just me?.........Ok then

 

omg OMG! Yes ! ^^^ this,

 

I was thinking it, but you had the lady nads to say it.! (I say "lady" from the screen name... I'm guessing) I totally thought that. Great minds....... :)

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

I'm looking forward to the Leah Remini interview tonight. I've always liked her, I'm interested in what she has to say about that horrible cult. I preordered her book on Kindle, can't wait for it to come out on Tuesday.

Edited by Maharincess
  • Like 9

Share this post


Link to post

I'm looking forward to the Leah Remini interview tonight. I've always liked her, I'm interested in what she has to say about that horrible cult. I preorderd her book on Kindle, can't wait for it to come out on Tuesday.

Me too!!!

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

Leah Remini is not perfect and admits that she has work to do to get over the 30 years of Scientology influences.  It's interesting that Scientology is doubling down and attacking her; the organization would certainly appear more church like if it quit bashing her.  The current actions of Scientology just reinforce the allegations that it's dangerous to leave or to speak out against Scientology.

  • Like 10

Share this post


Link to post

Having a good laugh here, after the show the ABC affiliate in Salt Lake City is presenting "facts" and sound bites from the local Scientology center. One cult, with bated breath, interviewing another while wondering "what goes on behind closed doors." LOL

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post

That hour with Leah flew by. I sat down with dinner just as it started and it seemed like it was over just as quick and I still wasn't done eating.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

I would like to tell a personal story about child services in Arkansas, as it relates to the Harris family story. My mom's family is from NE Arkansas. About fourteen years ago, my cousin was sent to prison for molesting his daughter. His wife had knowingly abandoned their two children and her husband, and moved to Florida. My mother and two aunts attempted to foster the children. DFCS believed my family was tainted by my cousin's actions, and sent the children to a foster home - not a good one.

I hired an attorney and attempted to gain custody. The prosecutor went to my cousin and promised him that if he sided with the children's mother (who after a year decided she wanted her children) he would be allowed to see them one last time before he went to prison. He agreed, the prosecutor broke his promise, and the children went to their mother.

The system is broken, and not only in Arkansas. I lived in Illinois and went through the process to be a foster parent to get my cousin's children (fingerprinting, home study through DCFS). Since I lost the kids, I forgot all about the fact that I was waiting for final approval. Well I was finally approved - about a year later. They called and I basically told them forget it you're too late. Some of the things they said in their literature - being a convicted felon does not automatically preclude you from being a foster parent. And a foster child can share a bedroom with an adult if the age difference isn't too great.

Edited by RedheadZombie
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

Interesting show.   I only wish they had more time to get into the beliefs of the religion .   And the way they manipulate people into believing. You pay to take classes, to rise in rank.   at the highest ranks, you are then told the tenets of the faith.   And it has to do with ALIENS, I kid you not.    It's a cognitive dissonance thing .   Once you've paid thousands of dollars to learn the secrets, you WILL believe it.  

to read about the craziness that is scientology -   http://www.xenu.net/

 

or. check out Wikipedia for XENU:

The story of Xenu is covered in OT III, part of Scientology's secret "Advanced Technology" doctrines taught only to advanced members who have undergone many hours of auditing and reached the state of Clear followed by Operating Thetan levels 1 and 2.[7][12] It is described in more detail in the accompanying confidential "Assists" lecture of October 3, 1968, and is dramatized in Revolt in the Stars (a screenplay written by L. Ron Hubbard in 1977).[7][22]

Hubbard wrote that Xenu was the ruler of a Galactic Confederacy 75 million years ago, which consisted of 26 stars and 76 planets including Earth, which was then known as "Teegeeack".[5][8][23] The planets were overpopulated, containing an average population of 178 billion.[1][4][6] The Galactic Confederacy's civilization was comparable to our own, with aliens "walking around in clothes which looked very remarkably like the clothes they wear this very minute" and using cars, trains and boats looking exactly the same as those "circa 1950, 1960" on Earth.[24]

Xenu was about to be deposed from power, so he devised a plot to eliminate the excess population from his dominions. With the assistance of psychiatrists, he gathered billions[4][5] of his citizens under the pretense of income tax inspections, then paralyzed them and froze them in a mixture of alcohol and glycol to capture their souls. The kidnapped populace was loaded into spacecraft for transport to the site of extermination, the planet of Teegeeack (Earth).[5] The appearance of these spacecraft would later be subconsciously expressed in the design of the Douglas DC-8, the only difference being that "the DC8 had fans, propellers on it and the space plane didn't".[21] When they had reached Teegeeack, the paralyzed citizens were unloaded around the bases of volcanoes across the planet.[5][8] Hydrogen bombs were then lowered into the volcanoes and detonated simultaneously,[8] killing all but a few aliens. Hubbard described the scene in his film script, Revolt in the Stars:

 

that's some crazy shit. 

Edited by backformore
  • Like 9

Share this post


Link to post

Beyond crazy. I read Jenna Miscaviage's book with my jaw on the floor. I don't know how they're allowed to do the things they do to kids. I can't wait to read Leah's book on Tuesday. I ordered it already, I'm hoping they'll send it to my Kindle early.

Edited by Maharincess
  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post

There's also the other scary side of Scientology - where it presents itself in "do-gooder" organizations that appear legit on the surface, but really front for the Scientology agenda...Narcanon, I'm looking at you.

 

A few years back I sat on a committee within our corporation that reviewed, granted and processed donation requests.  Sure 'nuff, in comes a written request from Narcanon.  I had already heard of the workings of L. Ron Hubbard via pieces I had read, and was familiar with the Narcanon/Scientology connection.  When I brought it up in committee, I was almost booed out of the room.  "How could we not consider a donation to this 'worthy' drug-fighting charity?"  Thank heavens for the internet and the ability to find instant information.  Apparently, once you donate to them, you're then bombarded with educational materials that are designed to subtly draw in recruits.

 

Dangerous stuff.

 

I applaud Leah Remini for her courage.

  • Like 12

Share this post


Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...

Customize font-size