--------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 210 VICTIMS/FALSEACC Ref: CDX00000Date: 09/25/95 From: VALERY FROSTY Time: 01:05am \/To: BILL SWAN (Read 2 times) Subj: Re: corresponding w/accu Dear Bill, About the letter writing campaigns.... I'd be happy to help! Val ~~~ ReneWave v1.00.wb2 (unregistered) --- Mankind = One Family * Origin: Family Rights Advocacy Online (510) 439-0712 (1:161/19) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 210 VICTIMS/FALSEACC Ref: CDX00001Date: 09/25/95 From: VALERY FROSTY Time: 01:05am \/To: RICK THOMA (Read 2 times) Subj: Conversation w/Bill Swan Dear Rick, Excellent idea! Count me in! I'd be happy to help! Even Michelle could stuff envelopes! One thing that can help too is: Directing the letters to the politicians that represent anyone involved in a case. For example, it took my grandfather's congressman in Wisconsin (Dave Obey) to get some positive action going on my case. We sent out letters to all Senators and Congressmen (even some Assemblymen) that represented ALL of our relatives and friends of the family. :) I can also provide fax numbers for many of these politicians. Give my love to Jennifer and the baby! Val ~~~ ReneWave v1.00.wb2 (unregistered) --- Mankind = One Family * Origin: Family Rights Advocacy Online (510) 439-0712 (1:161/19) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 210 VICTIMS/FALSEACC Ref: CDX00002Date: 09/25/95 From: ANTHONY GRIGOR-SCOTT Time: 02:46pm \/To: CASIMIR@SMH.COM.AU (Read 2 times) Subj: Freedom of Speech #1 `Freedom of Speech' In an article published on September 4, 1995 `The Sydney Morning Herald' together with journalist Jon Casimir, Father Brian Lucas, Spokesman for the Roman Catholic Church and Mr. Jeremy Jones of the Jewish Board of Deputies, jointly implied Bible Believers BBS and I are `anti-Semitic' and `racist'. This article spilled to another story: `Hatred on the Internet' - `THE DARK SIDE OF THE NET'. I found the treatment of Mr. Ernst Zundel, a courageous old man with no opportunity of defending himself, tasteless and dishonest cowardice. These few words in his defence reveal the lack of research and objective reporting which appears to be Mr. Casimir's trademark. To preserve the popular notion that it is some sort of newspaper, I expect `The Sydney Morning Herald' will publish what I have prepared. Ernst Zundel was unknown to me until about two months ago when I read a newsletter he publishes. The Herald labeled him a Nazi, when Mr. Zundel is in fact ANTI-Nazi. Like the words `anti-Semitic' and `racist', `Nazi' is a powerful word, and a very loose gun in the hands of irresponsibles with no regard for truth. When the late Mr. Eddie Mabo's grave was defaced, the Jewish lobby told us all it was the work of Nazis. If they did not control our Media, this lunatic suggestion would never have been mooted. The truth that it was Aboriginal youths who defaced the grave is a well-kept secret. I digress by way of illustration. This old man, Ernst Zundel is hated by the self-styled Jews because he dares to be outspoken on truth that exposes their lucrative schemes to trade on the myth of the gassing of 6-million, and anything else they might turn to empower themselves. His home in Toronto was bombed in 1984, and almost burned to the ground after a fire bomb in May, 1995. Car tires have been slashed, buildings defaced with threatening slogans, acid was thrown in the faces of coura- geous defence lawyers, he has been beaten almost to death and one man was killed by a car bomb. A Jewish group `justified' this killing in a letter to `Le Monde' and a Jewish organization called the media and took credit for the bombing of his house in 1984. For the sake of what he believes to be truth he has been jailed numerous times and fought 10-years to win a legal battle. (Like further information on the just man, Ernst Zundel, write Samisdat, 206 Carlton St., Toronto, Ont., Canada, M5A 2L1, Tel. 416-922-9850; FAX, 416-922-8614. Home page: http://www.kaiwan.com/~Greg.IHR/Zundel). Some group is so terrified of TRUTH they inflict violence and kill. Just last week I was associated with `racial hate material', vilified in the press, on radio and national television. An absurd claim to make against any Christian, yet published with demands for Parliamentary action. My `crime' was making two books available from Bible Believers BBS. Books which may be ordered from any book shop, or borrowed from any municipal library. Like Adam and Eve in the beginning, God places every man on the basis of free moral agency with the surety of reward or punishment. This totali- tarian behavior is un-manly and un-Australian. It is not traditional in this country. This is Australia. Whenever comments emanating from Bible Believers BBS mention something to do with Jews, we receive an avalanche of hateful mail, new users with strange names, unclean passwords, 666 phone numbers, and upload obscene pictures. And when Canadian lawyer Douglas Christie was defending Ernst Zundel against an unwarranted attack upon free speech and historical truth, he received death threats. What was Zundel's crime? He researched and wrote a brochure, `Did Six Million Really Die'. On the opening day of the trial, Christie and his legal assistant, Keltie Zubko, had to force their way through a cursing, spitting, punch- ing Jewish Defence League protest outside the court. Whoever these people are, they could not represent any race God might choose. This is the behavior of a people who know not God. Whoever they are, their nature is untouched by the sweetness of the Spirit which cultivated the civilizations of the Christian West. I'll quote from a transcript of Catholic lawyer Doug Christie's summary to the jury published as `The Zundel Trial and FREE SPEECH' for the edification of Mr. Jon Casimir and his superiors at `The Sydney Morning Herald' (sister paper to `The Jerusalem Post'), Mr. Jeremy Jones and his pals on the Board of Jewish Deputies, `Father' Brian Lucas of the Roman Catholic diocese of Sydney and impartial witnesses who desire to receive the TRUTH that they may repent of their error and FREED from prejudice evil men employ to persuade weak minds to their will. "... we'd better respect the rights of others who honestly believe that they are right, even though we may think they are wrong.... You don't have to share Mr. Zundel's opinions. He has a right to his; you have a right to yours. He's not questioning your right to yours. But there is a power that's questioning his right to his ... You have heard the evidence of many witnesses and I'd like to briefly capsulize some of the significant things about their evidence. You remember Arnold Freedman. He was transported in cattle cars, He con- stantly smelled smoke in Birkenau and saw it belching from chimneys. I want you to consider a very significant question which has troubled me. To create BELCHING CHIMNEYS, day in and day out, 24 hours a day, seven days a week for weeks on end, one needs coal or coke, large quantities of coal or coke. I've heard all the evidence, as you have, of the pro- cess of unloading the people into the concentration camps. Why would all those people be unloaded by the helpless prisoners like Dr. Vrba, and the coal be unloaded by the S.S.? Keep in mind, in the days of 1940 to '44, we didn't have back hoes, right? We didn't have caterpillars un- loading these trucks, coal cars. Everything apparently was done by hand. Well, you know, it makes me very, very interested, to put it mildly, that all this smoke and burning chimneys and flames shooting forth should occur with nobody unloading coke trains. Did you hear anybody talk of unloading coke trains? I didn't. To question should never be anti-anything. Why should it he? To think is not against anybody. To reason, to question, a thinking human being. So, I wonder, where does all this right to think go, if we can't ask the question: where were the coke trains? Where was the coal? The evidence of Mr. Zundel was that 80 pounds of coal is necessary to cremate a human body. The amount of energy to turn a human body into ashes is a morbid subject, of course, but it doesn't change. The laws of physics don't change for the Germans, for the Nazis, for the Jews, or anybody; they're all the same, the laws of physics. Now, 80 pounds of coal or coke for 1,765,000 people is nearly a hundred and sixty million pounds of coke. Where does all this come from? Nobody bothers to answer that, but they say that "Did Six Million Really Die?" is false. How is that question false? How is questioning anything false? Why should the editorial opinions of our writers be any different than Mr. Zundel's? How many editorials contain false news every day? How many newspaper stories, how many books, how many movies? What are we doing here? We're crucifying one man's opinion because they say he's not a nice man, when every day in all of' our society there's a thousand misquotes, misstatements. Well, what's the difference? I'll tell you what the difference is. This man has no political power and big newspa- pers and big television stations big radio stations, and big politicians do. That's the difference. When John Turner quotes Brian Mulroney, do you think he does it to approve of him? Do you think they quote each other out of context be- cause they wish to point out the inconsistencies of their opponent? the Crown, in his analysis, will no doubt say there are statements in "Did Six Million Really Die?" that are out of context, that the Red Cross did not say there was no extermination when they wrote their report, but it is true that they said there was NO extermination during the war, when they were in the camps. They don't even produce for you a shred of evidence of a gas chamber, but they say 1,765,000 people died by going between two buildings. Remember Dr. Vrba's evidence? Well, how do you accomplish that without a gas chamber? What, do they disappear and they're all shot? No, you have to justify the claim that millions died; you have to have gas chambers and there's no evidence to support them. Now the defence has tried to show that the alleged gas chambers at Auschwitz seen today, are impossibilities, scientific impossibilities. We have called evidence, witness after witness, to show they have tried to find the bottom of this story, and they have found nothing that makes sense to their experience. That's pretty significant stuff. That's pretty important analysis. Look what Dr. Faurisson has paid for his inquiries. He's been beaten; he's been beaten while he talked; he's been subjected to quite a bit of ridicule; but does anyone deny the sincerity or honesty of his inquiry or his intelligence or his detailed analysis of what documents there are? I suggest not.... --- GoldED/386 2.50.Beta5+ * Origin: Bible Believers BBS (61)-2-809-3723 West Ryde (3:711/933) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 210 VICTIMS/FALSEACC Ref: CDX00003Date: 09/25/95 From: ANTHONY GRIGOR-SCOTT Time: 03:02pm \/To: CASIMIR@SMH.COM.AU (Read 2 times) Subj: Freedom of Speech #2 Arnold Friedman also said that sick older people came into his barracks after the selection, and, therefore. were not killed. And then we come to the question of selection. He describes the selection process in referring to selecting professions even among the older people, Now. why would they select professions? To kill the people? What do you care, if you are just killing people? You don't care whether they are doctors, lawyers, tailors, whatever. I suggest the selections he referred to were selections for work. You don't select people by profession for the purpose of killing them, unless it's lawyers, and then there's lots of reasons for doing that.... I remember Dennis Urstein. He said, - and this is really, I suggest, where you've got to look a little bit skeptically - he said he lost 154 members of his family in the "Holocaust". I said: "Could you name even 20?" I suggest to you that if any of us say we lost 154 members of our family, it tends to be a little dubious. How many members of your family do you know and how many generations do you go back? I asked him to name 20. He didn't get there and ended up naming someone who died in the U.S.A. six or seven years ago. What it means is that people, because they suffer, tend to want you to understand their suffering and they sometimes exaggerate, that's all. Dennis Urstein was another volunteer witness who spoke of the colour of bodies hauled out of gas chambers. Now, Dennis Urstein says he hauled the bodies out of Leichenkeller I, which is an underground mortuary, in Krema II. Now, you can see on the plan where that is. It may have been Krema III, he said, but I'll tell you something. The two, Krema II and III, are identical. No one will deny that. The plans are there. The two, Krema II and III, in Birkenau are identical. They are long underground areas known as Leichenkellers. They are underground, because when typhus broke out, bodies, sometimes three or four hundred bodies, would be there, so that they would not infect the rest of the camp. The colour of those bodies, he described as grayish or green, but you heard Dr. Lindsay say that if someone is asphyxiated with Zyklon B, hydrogen cyanide, his body is brick red. Now, if they were gassed with Zyklon B, why would that not be so? There is another question that arises out of Urstein's evidence. The bodies, he said, had no rigor mortis. No rigor mortis. Now, if the bodies were gassed, and then, he seemed to imply, they were washed and thereby were safe. But if hydrogen cyanide is, as I suggested, water soluable, then touching water associated with the bodies means hydrogen- cyanic poisoning. Yet, he survived hauling those many bodies. He alleged the gas chamber was on ground level. Now, if you look at the plans, he is referring to other than the crematoria and he is referring to the Leichenkeller. He says that it's a closed-in area. That's underground. If you arc hauling bodies, you are not going to forget hauling them upstairs, but he says it was on ground level. I asked him about that several times and he repeated it several times. This is no minor error, because if he could remember hauling bodies upstairs, it would be hard to forget. Furthermore, he said there were no pillars. Well, look at the plans. If he is talking about Crematorium II or III, and if he is talk- ing about what he says he was talking about, a flat roofed building, [well,] the crematoria is not flat-roofed. The Leichenkeller is, and it is underground with a very small protuberance above the ground. This is where Vrba got himself into a real problem. This is a man who says he was an eye-witness. We are supposed to examine that evidence and look at what we know of the facts, and see ii it conforms. If it doesn't, there are reasons to doubt it. He says there were no pillars. If you'll look in the plans, you'll see in the Leichenkeller massive pillars. He said the ground adjacent to the crematorium was very beautiful, like a re- treat. No collection of piles of coke or other fuel to burn large numbers of bodies which allegedly were burned in the crematoria. Now, the story of the exterminations is that two to three thousand or more bodies a day were handled in these facilities. There has to be an explanation for the figure of 1,765,000 in two years [mentioned by] Vrba. If there are 80 pounds of coke required for each body, for two thousand bodies (that's what half of what Krema II is supposed to be handling a day), that's 160,000 pounds of coke a day. Let me deal with Dr. Barton for a moment. He presents the truth to the best of his knowledge. He agrees that what's in this pamphlet was accu- rate, and that it quoted his article. He was there. He WAS an eye- witness. In 1945, he was there and he was as brainwashed as everybody else at the time, saying the Germans deliberately intended the killing all these people shown in the movie. He believed all that. And gradually he began to think about it, looked into the kitchen and saw the prepara- tion records for food, and changed his mind. The war involved a little bit more than most people comprehended would be possible in the way of destruction. It's my suggestion to you that he treated the subject more scientifical- ly than most people of his time. Just look what happened to him. He dared to say that the Germans didn't mean to kill all those people, and you know they accuse him of now, on public television, as you've heard, [of killing] 15,000 Jews. [Sounds like the same unjust people who write unresearched, impossible stories which spread hatred through Sydney newspapers]. What I suggest to you is that when people disagree with the widely held views of their time, they are attacked viciously. He was attacked in the media, in the press and everywhere. Why? What did he do wrong? Well, he dared to say that the Germans were not all bad and the Allies were not all good, and that war itself was the cause of the problem. That's what he dared to say. He dared to say that the Allies were not all good; the Germans were not all bad; and that war killed people, but not gassing. So, what's the difference? I suppose the difference is that Dr. Barton was a witness and the accused is the accused. He said there was no treatment for typhus at that time. He thinks essentially, that views should be challenged. He agreed that the average age person, under conditions of being subject to massive public propaganda, coupled with fears for their families, destruction of their homes, their property, their value system and the desolation of their country, may be brain- washed and make confessions. They would not be able to respond indepen- dently of their captors. --- GoldED/386 2.50.Beta5+ * Origin: Bible Believers BBS (61)-2-809-3723 West Ryde (3:711/933) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 210 VICTIMS/FALSEACC Ref: CDX00004Date: 09/25/95 From: ANTHONY GRIGOR-SCOTT Time: 03:08pm \/To: CASIMIR@SMH.COM.AU (Read 2 times) Subj: Freedom of Speech #3 Dr. William Brian Lindsay testified that the interpretations of World War II should be looked at by a scientist. The basic problem is the vast number of charges in the readings about the Holocaust. Also, the various authorities have different answers. He said some of the primary sources of information about the Holocaust had been silent for 30 years, during which time history has been written. He looked at all the so-called murder camps in his research. He went to Belzec, Sobibor. Chelmno, Birkenau, Monowitz. He put himself in the position of knowing what the accusations are, and, as a chemist, decided how reasonable the charges are. In describing the properties of Zyklon B, [he discussed] the container it came in, the special opener that had to be used, the fact that the gas is lighter than air when it vaporizes, and that the best air would be at the bottom. Now, the Crown said that, well, it's not very much lighter than air and it would rise slowly and the crystals might have fallen on the ground, enabling people to believe that the gas would come from the ground first. But that wouldn't explain the fact that people would stay where the gas crystals were and stay there so they would climb above each other. They were scattered in other areas, but that wasn't asked by the Crown and that's why, when Mr. Griffiths asked him his questions, and I asked him mine, in the end he said he did not think his opinion had changed. He refers to the necessity of a venting system. No such thing exists in any of the plans. Look at the plans. That's because it is a Leichenkell- er, a mortuary, NOT a gas chamber. They want to call it a gas chamber? Then, produce the evidence. Where is it? He concluded that it's IMPOSSI- BLE that gassings happened as alleged. For millions to have been gassed in four crematoria, by the method described, 2000 persons crammed into a space of the size alleged, is IMPOSSIBLE. He refers to these spaces that are put forward as gas chambers as UN- SEALED rooms. The difficulties of unsealed rooms in comparison to the American gas chamber, became obvious. A small container for gas is necessary due to the quality of the gas itself. If it were otherwise, chemistry would change from time to time, and from place to place, but it doesn't. The fact is, that if there is an allegation of this kind, there has to be a real possibility of it having occurred. Otherwise, we are engaged in fantasy. He has examined the alleged gas chamber at Auschwitz I. There are no doors between gas chamber and the crematoria. Vents are not air-tight. The doors are very very small. The whole thing wouldn't work. And he comes to that conclusion himself. Now, he communicated this information to Zundel. So, why shouldn't Zundel believe him? Why shouldn't it be credible? Who has done more research into the subject'? Who has actually made a study into these gas chambers. I suppose the Crown will answer that by saying, it doesn't matter. If there are no gas chambers, we will find some other explana- tion for the six million. What? What was it - shooting, Einsatzgruppen, the Stroop report? It doesn't come to five million, especially when one considers the evidence in reference to the Einsatzgruppen. But we are supposed to believe anyway. Dr. Lindsay examined the Gerstein statement. He discussed how carbon- monoxide poisoning from a diesel engine is NOT possible. Yet, said that is said [to be the method used in] Sobibor, Treblinka and others - gas from diesel tank engines, from Russian tank engines. That is the story. Well, if carbon-monoxide is NOT produced by diesel engines, how is it supposed to be the cause of death? Then, we have the stories of [prison- ers] eating and drinking after handling the dead bodies. It would be suicidal. Shower baths would be abysmal to gas people. What story are we dealing with? The same story we had in Dachau. The gas chambers are not showers and the gas comes form the shower heads. Yet, DACHAU NOW HAS A SIGN THAT NOBODY WAS EVER GASSED THERE. Lindsay fought for the Allies during the war, and I suggest that he is not really to be regarded as one with an axe to grind. James Keegstra testified primarily to show what happens if you try to question the Holocaust. He is where he is today, not because of his attitude on anything else, but primarily because he dared to say that there's another view on the Holocaust. That's when it got picked up by the MEDIA. That's when the ball got rolling. That is when everybody got up in arms. If somebody has an opinion, on the flatness of the earth, nobody cares. If somebody has an opinion on politics, that's no problem. But if somebody says anything about the Holocaust, that implies they don't believe in it, hook, line and sinker, then they are in big trou- ble. It's bad for people who want to discuss it. It is also bad because it denies the possibility to find the TRUTH for everybody. So, there's a man who's been a teacher for 21 years, who has been the victim. I sug- gest, of a massive campaign of vilification because he dared to ques- tion. What a surprising thing! Anybody could be accused of rape, murder, theft or fraud. I'll bet they wouldn't [suffer] the animosity, the hate that occurs to anybody who questions the Holocaust or anybody who is accused of a war crime in the media. Tell me how many murderers have received the publicity against them that Frank Walus got? He hadn't been tried yet. He was accused of a hideous crime, but it was ridiculous. The man wasn't even in Poland during the War. He was seventeen years old and he was accused of being an Obergruppenfuhrer during the war, murdering Jews. And eleven witnesses came forward, and said, yes he was, and seven of those said they weren't even in Poland during the war. That's jus- tice? Well, that's not very much different than the atmosphere that prevailed in 1945 and that's why it is relevant to the issue today, because in this booklet it says Nuremberg was probably rife with preju- dice. If the hatred and the prejudice is so great today, that that type of thing can happen right now, in Chicago and in the U.S.A., how much greater do you think the pressure was in 1945 for the same result? This is 40 years later. And who gives Frank Walus anything for what he suffered? Or this man? Even if he is acquitted, who will take care to see that he gets justice, other than maybe an acquittal? The evidence of Gary Botting is that of an English professor who desired to put forward another view of the Holocaust story. He has presented, or attempted to present, in consideration of the need to tell both sides, the book "Hoax of the Twentieth Century". The Government of Canada decided nobody should read it in Canada. Why'? Is it obscene? Take a look at it and ask yourselves this question. ... Our forefathers fought for the right to be free to think and free to speak. Now, what are we doing here? The sacrifices of those who died for freedom are not respected by this legal proceeding. Gary Botting and others have paid their price for coming here. You can bet on that. Those same forces that will make this man spend seven weeks in that box will make every witness who comes here pay for having done so. You can be sure of that. Anyone who even dares to support this man's thesis will be LABELED. And that's supposed to be a free society? It's all very very sad. It may be, if some of those people who are dead, who thought they defended freedom, were alive, we might not be here today. Gary Botting said it's a dangerous precedent to do what's going on here. You know where his father is? He's buried at Belsen. That's what he told you. His father. Well, it's dangerous alright. He dared to write to the Attorney-General to question why he couldn't read this book or have the students read it. He has no sympathy for the Nazis. His attitude was that people should be free to hear both sides of an issue. No, not in Canada. We are not smart enough even to be able to read that book. We are not supposed to be able to read this book. We are not intelligent enough to decide whether we want to believe this or not. Is this the way we are supposed to use our brains? The measure of a person's honest inquiry is whether a person wants to examine alternative sources. Nobody asks them to be government-funded sources, sponsored by anybody. I remember at one point somebody said the research of Dr. Faurisson was not government-funded. So what? You mean to tell me that no one should be believed unless he is on a government subsidy? If Dr. Faurisson pays through his own efforts for his research, is that an indication he is insincere? Or, if some one publishes a book, like Udo Walendy, being a publisher himself, is this to discredit it too? Have we come to the stage of 198 where, unless it's published by Big Brother, it isn't to be believed? I remember the dramatic gesture performed by the Crown when he asked the accused: "Well, who published this? Institute of Historical Review?" Bang. So what? If they are all published by the Institute of Historical Review, so what? Have we come to the point where there is an official sanction on certain publishers? It is the old argument of don't look at the contents of the book, just see who publishes it. Well, if that is the case, I suppose the official view of history is already established. Doug Collins was a soldier during the war. He was captured at Dunkirk. He was in German prisoner of war camps during the war, he escaped, was recaptured, escaped and was interned again as far away as Rumania, and went to Bergen-Belsen even before Dr. Barton. One of the things he said about his own experience is, that when he saw the troops, coming hack, the S.S. released by the Russians, they reminded him of the prisoners in Bergen-Belsen, for their condition. He says "Did Six Million Really Die?" should be available. There isn't an abusive line in it. "I have been more abusive in my columns." He said politicians aren't entitled to suppress views. This is endemic to all dictatorships. He talked about Alice in Wonderland [being] banned in China. I wonder where we are. I remembered when the Crown was cross-examining my client on the stand, I almost had to pinch myself to find out if I was really in the country I grew up in, because he was asking him: "Do you believe this? Are you a racist? Did you write this?" What are we doing here? Is he on trial for his beliefs? Or is he on trial for this being false? Are we living in a free society, or are we not? He said, in the end, I guess, this country likes censorship. I wonder...." Consider YOUR verdict. How is it we allow ungodly men into our society, worship their fabric of brazen lies, and yield the sum of 2,000 years of Christian civilization? It's because of pulpit delinquency. Our churches are apostate and we don't know it. Once upon a time we were Christians. We knew it, and the world knew it. Now we have no identity. No principles, no Absolute. We are at the end, but for those who can receive, God sent a prophet in these last days. Evil spirits do not die, they just pass from one person to another. This excerpt from Ernst Zundel's trial is documentary evidence of the mastery of liars and their conspiracy of evil they have woven these past fifty years. Like Abraham we seek on earth no continuing city but a city whose Builder and maker is God. Soon He will take His children Home and these people will realize the fruits of their conspiracy. Then they'll cry for the mountains and rocks, `Fall on us, and hide us from the face of Him that sitteth on the throne, and from the Lamb'. (Like further information on the just man, Ernst Zundel, write Samisdat, 206 Carlton St., Toronto, Ont., Canada, M5A 2L1, Tel. 416-922-9850; FAX, 416-922-8614. Home page: http://www.kaiwan.com/~Greg.IHR/Zundel). --- GoldED/386 2.50.Beta5+ --- * Origin: Bible Believers BBS (61)-2-809-3723 West Ryde (3:711/933) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 210 VICTIMS/FALSEACC Ref: CDX00005Date: 09/23/95 From: BILL SWAN Time: 07:36am \/To: RICK THOMA (Read 2 times) Subj: corresponding w/accu RT>Do you have Netmail access? I think it's time that you and RT>I speak "voice" in reference to the matter we have been RT>discussing. Netmail... that's Fido e-mail, right? I'm sorry, I don't. I do have Usenet (Internet) e-mail, if you have access: bill@cygnus.wa.com Or snailmail, POB 2663, Kirkland WA 98083-2663 * OLX 2.1 TD * Cycling: The shorter the route the steeper the hills! --- Maximus 2.01wb * Origin: Sea East PC Exchange (1:343/15) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 210 VICTIMS/FALSEACC Ref: CDX00006Date: 09/23/95 From: BILL SWAN Time: 07:43am \/To: GEORGE HERO (Read 2 times) Subj: CA limits Social Worker GH>I recieved this from NASW. Opposition by antecdote, not surprising. GH>Theirs is an ad hominin arguement. To support the bill is to condone hild GH>abuse. Perhaps you can get across to NASW that many of the custody GH>arrangements that social workers impose on Fathers is also child abuse. GH>>"If AB 1355 succeeds into intimidating one social worker into leaving one GH>>child in a dangerous environment because that social worker is afraid of GH>>being sued, that is one more potential death or injury. GH>>[...] GH>>This week in Sacramento, one child was killed in Sacramento County as a GH>>result of child abuse. The alleged perpetrator evidently beat another" We've had some ironic turnabouts here in Washington (_now_ I wish I had saved the articles). Included among them is a "Boy's Ranch" where abused boys had been placed by the child-savers... only to suffer continued molestation. And DSHS is *still* trying to cover up, after months of public investigation. (The head, Jean Soliz, is becoming known as "Jean Sleaze".) * OLX 2.1 TD * "Erring on the side of the child" is also child abuse! --- Maximus 2.01wb * Origin: Sea East PC Exchange (1:343/15) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 210 VICTIMS/FALSEACC Ref: CDX00007Date: 09/23/95 From: BILL SWAN Time: 08:17am \/To: GEORGE HERO (Read 2 times) Subj: HR4 Child Protection Sta GH>Attached is a portion of H.R.4, Newt's Personal Responsibility Act of GH>1995 (passed by the US House). It seems that section HR4:424 would replace GH>the Mondale Act - Title 42:5101 Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment and GH>Adoption (CAPTA). GH>What's troubling is that I don't see anything that would reduce the number GH>of false accusations of child abuse [...] GH>HR4:425 Does establish "Citizen Review Panels", but if the panels are GH>stacked with child abuse industry people who believe allegation=guilt - then GH>innocent families are still going to ripped apart by false accusations of GH>child abuse. You are quite correct, George. These panels are going to become another version of the Guardian Ad Litem (GAL) program; created to provide an independent voice, speaking for the child, in the courtroom but coopted through contact and "education" (propaganda) by the child-savers. Ironically, the "Citizen Review Panels" are an old VOCAL idea -- but there (as I heard it 10 years ago) the idea was that these panels would be local, reviewing every single case *before* significant action took place. A bit naive even then, but better than this! This plan establishes three (3) panels (do you think there will really be more?) meeting quarterly (ditto); that works out to 12 meetings per year per state. Not much time to review all the cases coming forward -- even if the panels were interested in sorting wheat from chaff. What I see as likely to happen is that the panels will be overwhelmed if they attempt to do their work -- and likely they won't because the child-savers will provide them with the same "education" routinely provided judges -- so they will wind up rubber-stamping whatever the State has done, thus providing the State with even more ammunition against the parents in court. GH>Maybe the "Citizen Review Panels" section of HR4 should be revised to REQUIRE GH>some panel members to be parents who are victims of a false accusation of GH>child abuse. I don't think we have yet the requisite number of active voices to force this to happen. GH> `(b) PLACEMENT OF CHILDREN WITH RELATIVES- A State to which a grant GH>is made under this part may consider-- GH> `(1) establishing a new type of foster care placement, which GH> could be considered a permanent placement, for children who are GH> separated from their parents (in this subsection referred to as GH> `kinship care') under which-- GH> `(A) adult relatives of such children would be the preferred GH> placement option if such relatives meet all relevant child GH> protection standards established by the State; H> `(2) in placing children for adoption, giving preference to adult GH> relatives who meet applicable adoption standards (including those GH> acting as foster parents of such children). This is terribly flawed: 1. The state "may" consider. It doesn't have to, and it still gets the money. This section, nice as it sounds, is thus gratuitous. 2. This, "placement will relatives willing and able to care for the child" has been for a long time the law in Washington State -- but honoured in the breach. And our judges fail to uphold it. 3. The requirement that the adult relatives "meet all relevant...standards" will be another easy out for the social workers. From experience, these standards are not firm, precise standards, they aren't written like the mechanical tolerances of an airplane bolt. They are vague, loose, they shift and change depending upon the desired goal. GH> `(2) in placing children for adoption, giving preference to adult GH> relatives who meet applicable adoption standards (including those GH> acting as foster parents of such children). This will suffer from the same flaws mentioned above. * OLX 2.1 TD * Taxes: A fool and your money are soon partners. --- Maximus 2.01wb * Origin: Sea East PC Exchange (1:343/15) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 210 VICTIMS/FALSEACC Ref: CDX00008Date: 09/23/95 From: BILL SWAN Time: 08:53am \/To: ALL (Read 2 times) Subj: One small milestone One small milestone passed: our two daughters, 6 and 13, finally met face-to-face! The two have talked on the phone upon occasion, but as the younger is on the East coast, the older on the West, there has been little opportunity for them to meet. Until now, when a gift made it all possible. When Heather was born, her sister had been in the bowels of the foster care system for four years; we were three years into our appeals. We knew that if the State knew about the pregnancy that they would take the baby at birth (in one case we learned about -- in the papers -- the mother was actually ordered shackled until the birth!); Exodus 1:19 provided the plan. The pregnancy was kept hidden from the state and Heather was born out of the county, on Monday. Wednesday she was baptized (per our custom) at home (which is not). Friday, when the doctor gave the green light for travel, my mother took her to the airport to give to Kathleen's parents, returning home, at the last possible moment to reduce the risk of a last-minute intervention. In fact when the State did learn of Heather, they sent an attorney to the East Coast to fetch her back. He failed. Much time passed before the older could be told of the existence of her younger sister. But yesterday Heather's grandparents flew with her to the West Coast for the girls to meet face-to-face. I am told (we were not there, for reasons and purposes too long to go into) that they picked up the older sister from school. When she came out and saw the family, and her sister Heather, she dropped her books, ran across the lawn, picked Heather up and the two just hugged each other and cried. I received a joyful call a few hours later; the two have been inseparable. Together at last. They have three days together before Heather and her grandparents have to return home. We have no idea now when they will be able to see each other again, or be together, but until then at least they have had this time. * OLX 2.1 TD * Government corruption is always reported in past tense. --- Maximus 2.01wb * Origin: Sea East PC Exchange (1:343/15) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 210 VICTIMS/FALSEACC Ref: CDX00009Date: 09/25/95 From: DAVID KISSIAH Time: 07:16pm \/To: GEORGE HERO (Read 2 times) Subj: For your info... Hello George! George the list is far from complete. There are very many serving long prison terms who never made the headlines. There is a MR. Grey locally who has been imprisoned for close to 20 years and is up for release soon for sexually abusing his daughter.I have talked to his now grown daughter and she cries and says she has always wanted to tell the truth but in the first the DSS told her she would be removed from her home and sent to a orphanage Later she feared what her father would do when he was released. She says if it was her in there for being falsely accused she would kill the accuser on her release . So she fears her fathers release. There has to be many more like him David * WCE 2.1G1/2045 * In a VERY weak moment, I started a BBS. --- GEcho 1.20/Pro * Origin: Borderline! BBS Concord, N.C. (1:379/37)