Reid

Following up to Keith Willshaw

    >That was rather my point, the OP is apparently British

He must be, the last sentence seemed slightly ironic. :-)

David Horne

Keith Willshaw <> wrote:

    > "Reid" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > > Following up to Keith Willshaw
    > >
    > > >> Americans treat their young.
    > > >
    > > >Have you forgotten about the child cruelty cases in Britain ?
    > >
    > > why pick on US or UK, what country doesn't have such things?
    > > --
    >
    > That was rather my point, the OP is apparently British

I though he just lived in the UK.

David

Go Fig

In article <>,
Reid <> wrote:

    > Following up to Keith Willshaw
    >
    > >Not if the point was the usual anti-Americanism posted on this
    > >newsgroup I didnt.
    >
    > You get anti UK just the same, there are always people who feel
    > clever posting some lame jibe, today there was IIRC Brits don't
    > tip, Brits drink too much and a lame attempt to upset people
    > with something or other about Sterling. People just assume there
    > will be lots of Brits and Yanks to insult here. There has also
    > been no shortage of Americans posting anti French nonsense.
    > I though US parents starves kids makes a change from the usual
    > Americans too fat threads.

The real story is that the gov, despite mandated visits, failed to
protect these children. Oddly, they only starved the boys, they had
young girls in their care that were found normal.

jay
Tue, Oct 28, 2003
mailto:

Keeger

"Deep Freud Moors" <deepfloydmars@yIaWONThBITEoYA!o.co.uk> wrote:

It's a tragedy and such things happen in every country on Earth.

But you have managed to distinguish yourself as a gutless Troll.

K

Evelynvogtgamble

Keith Willshaw wrote:
    >
    > "Andiii" <member@british_expats.com> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > >
    > > You completely missed the point, Keith.
    > >
    >
    > Not if the point was the usual anti-Americanism posted on this
    > newsgroup I didnt.

Well, Keith, it WAS a genuine news story, here in the U.S. (even made it
as far as California, which is on the opposite coast). I think DFM's
point was that you cannot generalize about an entire people from a
single, isolated example. (Also he's a regular poster here, who
contributes some interesting observations - I don't think it's fair to
call him a "troll".)

Of course, the New Jersey Child Welfare Department has some issues to
answer, since it supposedly screened the home and approved the adoptive
parents for each of their six adoptions. (Incidentally, the parents
starved the four boys, but fed the two adopted girls adequately - while
forcing the boys to observe them eating.) The irony is, these same
sickos had just been approved to adopt a SEVENTH child! (I suspect
public outcry will cause a few heads to roll in the New Jersey welfare
system - let's hope it does some good.)

Evelynvogtgamble

Alan Pollock wrote:
    >

    > The original poster likely intended nobody to take it at face value,

Why not, when it was a genuine news story, which even hit the media
outlets here in Los Angeles?

hence the
    > value of throwing it back, especially when very often the same kinds of
    > criticisms from the same poster are in dead earnest.

Did EVERYONE else miss the point he was making? That you cannot
legitimately apply a single negative label to an entire culture? (Why
do you think he mentioned Muslims - whom we Americans seem to be blaming
for all the world's ills, these days?)

Evelynvogtgamble

Keeger wrote:
    >
    > "Deep Freud Moors" <deepfloydmars@yIaWONThBITEoYA!o.co.uk> wrote:
    >
    > It's a tragedy and such things happen in every country on Earth.
    >
    > But you have managed to distinguish yourself as a gutless Troll.

And YOU have managed to distinguish YOURSELF as someone who seldom reads
this newsgroup, nor comprehends what he reads when he does! DFM may
change his screen name slightly from time to time (always retaining the
same initials) but he is a regular and "normal" poster to this
newsgroup. Some of his posts are provocative, but they have never
expressed anti-American prejudice (except ironically, as in the one that
touched off all this indignation). Far better be indignant with the New
Jersey welfare services who placed a series of SIX children in that
home, theoretically screening the adoptive parents each time! (And,
according to the newscast I heard, had just approved those monsters to
adopt a seventh child!)

Deep Freud Moors

Hatunen <> wrote in message
news:...
    > On Tue, 28 Oct 2003 21:55:55 +1100, "Deep Freud Moors"
    > <deepfreudmoors@eITmISaVALIDiREALLY!l.nu> wrote:
    > >No need. I purposefully chose a news story that would get a reaction out
of
    > >people, so it's not surprising you dismissed it as yet another epic
thread
    > >generator. The point I was trying to make was somewhat subtle, and hidden
in
    > >sarcasm, like much of what I say.
    > >
    > >Still, it resulted in some interesting responses.
    > In view of the fact that this is rec.travel.europe and you
    > engaged in racial/ethnic examples, what did you expect a mention
    > of a bit of local American news to elicit?

Some interesting responses? )
---
DFM

Miguel Cruz

Deep Freud Moors <deepfloydmars@yIaWONThBITEoYA!o.co.uk> wrote:
    > I've just got to change that email address. What nationality should I become
    > next?

You could always come to Niue. Nobody has any grudges against us, because
they have no idea who we are.

miguel

Hatunen

On Tue, 28 Oct 2003 14:13:16 -0800,
"EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque)" <"evgmsop-no spam"@earthlink.net>
wrote:

    >Keeger wrote:
    >>
    >> "Deep Freud Moors" <deepfloydmars@yIaWONThBITEoYA!o.co.uk> wrote:
    >>
    >> It's a tragedy and such things happen in every country on Earth.
    >>
    >> But you have managed to distinguish yourself as a gutless Troll.
    >And YOU have managed to distinguish YOURSELF as someone who seldom reads
    >this newsgroup, nor comprehends what he reads when he does! DFM may
    >change his screen name slightly from time to time (always retaining the
    >same initials) but he is a regular and "normal" poster to this
    >newsgroup. Some of his posts are provocative, but they have never
    >expressed anti-American prejudice (except ironically, as in the one that
    >touched off all this indignation). Far better be indignant with the New
    >Jersey welfare services who placed a series of SIX children in that
    >home, theoretically screening the adoptive parents each time! (And,
    >according to the newscast I heard, had just approved those monsters to
    >adopt a seventh child!)

I don't know if there area any other foster parents on this
group, but my wife and I have been foster parents for some twenty
years, specializing in infants with medical needs, and have even
adopted two of our foster children, so I do know a bit about
this. Frankly, we're just as baffled as everyone else.

The only rationale I can come up with is that government
caseworkers are so anxious to get children's cases closed that
they were eager for these people to adopt the children and tended
to look the other way for fear of queering the deal. Of course,
once the children are adopted the caseworker has little more to
do with it; I am not completely up on the timeline in this case
and sure would like to know more. For instance, did these kids go
to school, and if so, where was the school system once they saw
the kids? How did they continue to abuse a 19 year old, he being
an adult under law and perfectly free to escape?

I'd also like to know if Aid to Adoptive Parents was involved.
AAP is monthly payments made to adoptive parents.


************* DAVE HATUNEN () *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *