http://groups.google.com/group/misc.kids?hl=en
Today's topics:
* Flu shot destroys baby Saba's life - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.kids/t/60f34c32677f5cb9?hl=en
* The Wikipedia Child Abuse and Ritual Abuse Cover Up - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.kids/t/bc03398268712de0?hl=en
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Flu shot destroys baby Saba's life
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.kids/t/60f34c32677f5cb9?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Mon, Apr 4 2011 3:55 am
From: dr_jeff
On 4/4/11 1:05 AM, jen80 wrote:
> dr_jeff;512034 Wrote:
>> On 4/2/11 8:54 AM, albert.macintosh wrote:-
>> That is very very sad to hear that a Baby is passed due to Flu.-
>>
>> Sadly, the flu shot was most likely a coincidence and had nothing to do
>>
>> with the child's death. But it is still very sad that the child died.
>> And, that the child's death is being used against life-saving vaccines.
>>
>> Unfortunately, people remember unfounded fears, as is seen in Minnesota:
>>
>> http://tinyurl.com/3zfoqcw
>
> Hello All
>
> I have no desire to become involved with theoretical arguments, but in
> the case of Saba it is true that her reaction was caused by the flu
> vaccine. This story is from Perth Western Australia and if you would
> like varification I'm sure you can search and find stories of the "bad
> batch" of the flu vaccine that was given to babies and children here
> last year - hundreds of children displayed reactions, many of those
> hospitalised (Saba's being the most serious) within hours of recieving
> the shot.
>
> So while I have no desire to debate the positive or negative aspects of
> vaccination, in this case, it is absolutely certain that her injuries
> are a result of her vaccination.
>
> Thankyou
Absolutely certain: Not likely:
<http://vaccinenewsdaily.com/news/212883-australian-flu-vaccine-maker-denies-bad-batch-cause-for-illnesses>
Either way, I am very sad for the girl and her family. And, nothing we
do in life is totally without risk. However, the benefits of vaccines
clearly outweigh the risks.
Jeff
==============================================================================
TOPIC: The Wikipedia Child Abuse and Ritual Abuse Cover Up
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.kids/t/bc03398268712de0?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Tues, Apr 5 2011 6:53 pm
From: childadvocate
http://ritualabuse.us/ritualabuse/articles/wikipedia-has-a-long-history-of-problems/
http://www.childlaw.us/2010/04/congress-reacts-to-wikipedia-f.html
http://endritualabuse.org/activism/wikipedia-blacklisted-four-important-websites/
Wikipedia has a long history of problems with accuracy, bias and
allegations of connections to pedophilia and pornography.
1) The Bomis Connection
2) Pedophilia Allegations
3) Wikipedia Accuracy Problems
4) Summary of the problems with Wikipedia
5) Bias in child abuse articles – banning websites with information on
child abuse crimes
The Bomis Connection
Wikipedia was financially supported by Bomis a dot-com company that
was founded in 1996. It was founded by Jimmy Wales (one of the
founders of Wikipedia) and Tim Shell. Bomis ran a website called Bomis
Premium at premium.bomis.com until 2005, offering customers access to
premium, X-rated pornographic content.
Until mid-2005, Bomis featured the Bomis Babe Report publishing news
and reviews about celebrities, models, and the adult entertainment
industry. The Babe Report linked to Bomis Premium and often posted
updates about new models joining Bomis. Bomis has operated
nekkid.info, a free repository of selected erotic photographs. Bomis
continues to host The Babe Engine, which indexes photos ranging from
glamour photography to pornography. (from Wikipedia)
also see :
Congress Reacts to Wikipedia Firestorm By James R. Marsh on April 29,
2010 http://www.childlaw.us/2010/04/congress-reacts-to-wikipedia-f.html
Pedophilia Allegations
FOX News ran an expose on the connections of child pornography,
Wikimedia and Wikipedia.
Wikipedia Distributing Child Porn, Co-Founder Tells FBI By Jana
Winter FOXNews.com April 27, 2010
http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/04/27/wikipedia-child-porn-larry-sanger-fbi/
"The parent company of Wikipedia is knowingly distributing child
pornography, the co-founder of the online encyclopedia says, and he's
imploring the FBI to investigate.
Larry Sanger, who left Wikipedia in 2002, said Wikimedia Commons (the
parent company of Wiki products including Wikipedia, Wiktionary,
Wikinews and Wikiquote) is rife with renderings of children performing
sexual acts. Sanger sent a letter to the FBI earlier this month
outlining his concerns and identifying two specific Wikimedia Commons
categories he believes violate federal obscenity law. The first
category, entitled "Pedophilia," contains 25-30 explicit and detailed
drawings of children performing sexual acts. The category was created
three years ago. The second, "Lolicon," provides cartoons similar in
detail and depiction. One of the more egregious cartoons shows a
rendering of a young child about to perform oral sex on a much older
man." Wikimedia Foundation posted an online response stating that The
Wikimedia Foundation obeys the law and had not been contacted by the
FBI or any other law-enforcement agency about allegedly illegal
content. They stated that they delete illegal material when they are
told about it.
Wikipedophilia By James R. Marsh on April 20, 2010
http://www.childlaw.us/2010/04/wikipedophilia.html
"About two years ago, rumors started floating around about Wikipedia's
involvement with child pornography and the pedophile agenda. First
there was a row about this image on Wikipedia depicting child nudity.
Then there was the long-standing allegation by Perverted Justice that:
Pedophiles have long sought to use Wikipedia to justify and promote
their agenda. They organize together in order to create Wikipedia
accounts and then seek to use Wikipedia's all-inclusiveness to promote
their point of view. When pointed out, Wikipedians themselves often
don't believe that there is an organized campaign to subvert the user-
edited encyclopedia in order to promote the pedophile agenda.
http://www.wikisposure.com/Wikipedia_Campaign
Well now these allegations have risen to a new level. Last week,
Wikipedia co-founder Larry Sanger reported the site's parent
organization to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, saying he
believes the Wikimedia Commons "may be knowingly distributing child
pornography."
EXCLUSIVE: Shakeup at Wikipedia in Wake of Porn Purge By Jana Winter –
FOXNews.com 5/14/10 updated on May 17, 2010
On May 7, FoxNews.com reported exclusively that Wales had personally
deleted many of the images from Wikimedia's servers, and that he'd
ordered that thousands more be purged. Now many of those images have
been restored to their original web pages….
http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/05/14/exclusive-shake-wikipedia-porn-pressure/
see http://ritualabuse.us/2010/06/issue-93-july-2010/
for more information on the Wikipedia – Pedophilia allegations
Wikipedia Accuracy Problems
There have been a variety of newspaper articles and studies over the
years showing accuracy problems with Wikipedia.
Comparison of Wikipedia and other encyclopedias for accuracy,
breadth, and depth in historical articles
Findings – The study did reveal inaccuracies in eight of the nine
entries and exposed major flaws in at least two of the nine Wikipedia
articles. Overall, Wikipedia's accuracy rate was 80 percent compared
with 95-96 percent accuracy within the other sources. This study does
support the claim that Wikipedia is less reliable than other reference
resources. Furthermore, the research found at least five unattributed
direct quotations and verbatim text from other sources with no
citations.
http://www.emeraldinsight.com/Insight/viewContentItem.do;jsessionid=B5971624ED12D3D4BFBFFC762150B834?contentType=Article&contentId=1674221
Scope, Completeness, and Accuracy of Drug Information in Wikipedia.
Ann Pharmacother. 2008;42(12):1814-1821
RESULTS: Wikipedia was able to answer significantly fewer drug
information questions (40.0%) compared with Medscape Drug Reference
(MDR) (82.5%; p < 0.001). Wikipedia performed poorly regarding
information on dosing, with a score of 0% versus the MDR score of
90.0%. Answers found in Wikipedia were 76.0% complete, while MDR
provided answers that were 95.5% complete; overall, Wikipedia answers
were less complete than those in Medscape (p < 0.001). No factual
errors were found in Wikipedia, whereas 4 answers in Medscape
conflicted with the answer key; errors of omission were higher in
Wikipedia (n = 48) than in MDR (n = 14). There was a marked
improvement in Wikipedia over time, as current entries were superior
to those 90 days prior (p = 0.024).
CONCLUSIONS: Wikipedia has a more narrow scope, is less complete,
and has more errors of omission than the comparator database.
Wikipedia may be a useful point of engagement for consumers, but is
not authoritative and should only be a supplemental source of drug
information.
http://www.theannals.com/cgi/content/abstract/42/12/1814
Wikipedia itself makes no guarantee of validity at its General
Disclaimer page.
quotes:
WIKIPEDIA MAKES NO GUARANTEE OF VALIDITY
"Please be advised that nothing found here has necessarily been
reviewed by people with the expertise required to provide you with
complete, accurate or reliable information."
"However, Wikipedia cannot guarantee the validity of the information
found here. The content of any given article may recently have been
changed, vandalized or altered by someone whose opinion does not
correspond with the state of knowledge in the relevant fields."
"Wikipedia is not uniformly peer reviewed; while readers may correct
errors or engage in casual peer review, they have no legal duty to do
so and thus all information read here is without any implied warranty
of fitness for any purpose or use whatsoever."
Wikipedia 'shows CIA page edits'
An online tool that claims to reveal the identity of organisations
that edit Wikipedia pages has revealed that the CIA was involved in
editing entries.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/6947532.stm
See Who's Editing Wikipedia - Diebold, the CIA, a Campaign
By John Borland Email 08.14.07 The result: A database of 34.4 million
edits, performed by 2.6 million organizations or individuals ranging
from the CIA to Microsoft to Congressional offices, now linked to the
edits they or someone at their organization's net address has made.
Some of this appears to be transparently self-interested, either
adding positive, press release-like material to entries, or deleting
whole swaths of critical material.
http://www.wired.com/politics/onlinerights/news/2007/08/wiki_tracker
Jimbo Wales ends death by Wikipedia
Kennedy murder shames online cult
By Cade Metz in San Francisco
On Tuesday afternoon, following a Washington luncheon celebrating the
inauguration of President Barack Obama, longtime US Senators Ted
Kennedy and Robert Byrd kicked the proverbial bucket. At least, that's
what happened in Wikiland. In our world, they're still among the
living.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/01/22/wikipedia_vandalism_crackdown/
Wikipedia black helicopters circle Utah's Traverse Mountain
By Cade Metz in San Francisco 6th December 2007
Wikipedia is not a democracy. But the totalitarian attitudes of the
site's ruling clique go much further than Jimbo cares to acknowledge.
In early September, the Wikipedia inner circle banned edits from 1,000
homes and one massive online retailer in an attempt to suppress the
voice of one man.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/12/06/wikipedia_and_overstock/
The word on Wikipedia: Trust but verify
Popular online encyclopedia, plagued by errors, troubles educators By
Lisa Daniels and Alex Johnson msnbc.com and NBC News
March. 29, 2007 "I was looking at a stack of final examinations," said
Waters, a professor of Japanese studies at Middlebury College in
Vermont, "and I found several instances of misinformation that [were]
identical from one student to another." All of those students in
Waters' Japanese history class late last year had been steered wrong
by the same source — Wikipedia, the sprawling online encyclopedia that
has revolutionized how ordinary people find information.
….The department banned students from using it as a source in their
papers, although they are allowed to consult it for background
material, a move that was quickly mimicked by professors at other
schools, including UCLA and the University of Pennsylvania.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17740041/
10 Questions: Jimmy Wales 3/21/07
How can I persuade my teachers to allow me to use Wikipedia as a
legitimate research source?—Kaitlyn Grigsby, Medina, Ohio
I would agree with your teachers that that isn't the right way to use
Wikipedia. The site is a wonderful starting point for research. But
it's only a starting point because there's always a chance that
there's something wrong, and you should check your sources if you are
writing a paper.
http://www.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,1601491,00.html
One great source — if you can trust it
By Hiawatha Bray, Globe Staff July 12, 2004
So of course Wikipedia is popular. Maybe too popular. For it lacks one
vital feature of the traditional encyclopedia: accountability. Old-
school reference books hire expert scholars to write their articles,
and employ skilled editors to check and double-check their work.
Wikipedia's articles are written by anyone who fancies himself an
expert….
Ross admits to reading and enjoying Wikipedia, and has even gotten
ideas there for future Britannica articles. But the absence of
traditional editorial controls makes Wikipedia unsuited to serious
research. "How do they know it's accurate?" Ross asks. "People can put
down anything."
http://web.archive.org/web/20060621181459/http://www.boston.com/business/technology/articles/2004/07/12/one_great_source____if_you_can_trust_it/
Wikipedia and Beyond – Jimmy Wales' sprawling vision -
Katherine Mangu-Ward from the June 2007 issue
Wales moved to Chicago and became a futures and options trader. After
six years of betting on interest rates and currency fluctuations, he
made enough money to pay the mortgage for the rest of his life. In
1998 he moved to San Diego and started a Web portal, Bomis, which
featured, among other things, a "guy-oriented search engine" and
pictures of scantily clad women. The en déshabillé ladies have since
caused trouble for Wales, who regularly fields questions about his
former life as a "porn king." In a typically blunt move, Wales often
responds to criticism of his Bomis days by sending reporters links to
Yahoo's midget porn category page. If he was a porn king, he suggests,
so is the head of the biggest Web portal in the world….
Wikipedia does fail sometimes. The most famous controversy over its
accuracy boiled over when John Seigenthaler Sr., a former assistant to
Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy, wrote about his own Wikipedia
entry in a November 2005 USA Today op-ed. The entry on Seigenthaler
included a claim that he had been involved in both Kennedy
assassinations. "We live in a universe of new media," wrote
Seigenthaler, "with phenomenal opportunities for worldwide
communications and research-but populated by volunteer vandals with
poison-pen intellects."….
Wikipedia's other major scandal hasn't been quite as easy for Wales
to laugh off, because he was the culprit. In 2005 he was caught with
his hand on the edit button, taking advantage of Wikipedia's open
editing policy to remove Larry Sanger from the encyclopedia's official
history of itself. There has been an ongoing controversy about Wales'
attempts to edit his own Wikipedia entry, which is permitted but
considered extremely bad form. After a round of negative publicity
when the edits were discovered, Wales stopped editing his own profile.
But in the site's discussion pages, using the handle "Jimbo Wales," he
can be found trying to persuade others to make changes on this and
other topics.
http://reason.com/archives/2007/05/30/wikipedia-and-beyond
A Little Sleuthing Unmasks Writer of Wikipedia Prank By KATHARINE Q.
SEELYE December 11, 2005
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/11/business/media/11web.html
Wikipedia's Accountability Problem By Daniel Brandt
Saturday, January 21, 2006
There is a problem with the structure of Wikipedia. The basic problem
is that no one, neither the Trustees of Wikimedia Foundation, nor the
volunteers who are connected with Wikipedia, consider themselves
responsible for the content. If you don't believe me, then carefully
read Wikipedia's disclaimer. At the same time that no one claims
responsibility, there are two unique characteristics of Wikipedia that
can be very damaging to a person, corporation, or group. The first is
that anyone can edit an article, and there is no guarantee that any
article you read has not been edited maliciously, and remains
uncorrected in that state, at the precise time that you access that
article.
The second unique characteristic is that Wikipedia articles, and in
some cases even the free-for-all "talk" discussions behind the
articles, rank very highly in the major search engines. This means
that Wikipedia's potential for inflicting damage is amplified by
several orders of magnitude.
http://www.pressaction.com/news/weblog/full_article/brandt01212006/
Wikipedia Watch – This site examines the phenomenon of Wikipedia. We
are interested in them because they have a massive, unearned influence
on what passes for reliable information.
http://www.wikipedia-watch.org/
Wikipedia to Limit Changes to Articles on People By NOAM COHEN
August 24, 2009 Although Wikipedia has prevented anonymous users from
creating new articles for several years now, the new flagging system
crosses a psychological Rubicon. It will divide Wikipedia's
contributors into two classes — experienced, trusted editors, and
everyone else — altering Wikipedia's implicit notion that everyone has
an equal right to edit entries….Under the current system, it is not
difficult to insert false information into a Wikipedia entry, at least
for a short time. In March, for example, a 22-year-old Irish student
planted a false quotation attributed to the French composer Maurice
Jarre shortly after Mr. Jarre's death. It was promptly included in
obituaries about Mr. Jarre in several newspapers, including The
Guardian and The Independent in Britain. And on Jan. 20, vandals
changed the entries for two ailing senators, Edward M. Kennedy and
Robert C. Byrd, to report falsely that they had died.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/25/technology/internet/25wikipedia.html
The 15 Biggest Wikipedia Blunders JR Raphael, PC World
Aug 26, 2009 Here are 15 of the biggest Wikipedia blunders the new
editing system might have prevented. These false facts, according to
widely published accounts, all appeared on the Wikipedia site at some
point.
http://www.pcworld.com/article/170874/the_15_biggest_wikipedia_blunders.html
Summary of the problems with Wikipedia
1) There is no guarantee its information is correct.
2) Its editors are anonymous and may be biased about the topic they
are writing about and may be unqualified to write encyclopedia
articles.
3) There is inconsistent or no fact checking, depending on the
article.
4) The rules of Wikipedia at times are used to control article
content and delete other content from strong sources.
5) Experts working on certain topics in Wikipedia may be derided and
discouraged from contributing to certain articles.
Therefore, one is probably better off reading a real encyclopedia or
journal article, due to the potential for reading inaccurate
information and a slanted or biased article.
Bias in child abuse articles – banning websites with information on
child abuse crimes
Editors and Administrators have worked hard to maintain a strong bias
from the perspective of the alleged or convicted perpetrators in a
variety of child abuse articles, including the ones connected to
ritual abuse topics. Even when presented with information directly
from court cases, this information has been deleted from articles.
Several administrators watch these articles, to make sure that
balancing information is not allowed in these articles. Even when the
perpetrators discussed in these articles were convicted of a child
abuse or ritual abuse crime and lost every appeal, many Wikipedia
articles will still lean toward the perspective that the conviction
was unjust and not allow added information from the victim's
perspective of the crimes.
Editors attempting to make these articles balanced have been harassed
and even banned from Wikipedia. Several web pages with legal case,
scientific journal articles and mainstream newspaper articles have
been banned by Wikipedia.
Wikipedia has blacklisted four websites that describe ritual child
abuse and extreme child abuse crimes in detail. These sites are:
http://extreme-abuse-survey.net , http://ritualabuse.us ,
http://www.endritualabuse.org and http://abusearticles.wordpress.com
These sites contain journal articles and news accounts of these
crimes. These websites are perfectly fine websites with accurate legal
information with a variety of scientific studies and news articles. It
appears that no pages in Wikipedia will be allowed to have any links
to these sites.
blacklisting and deleting important information from Wikipedia
http://abusearticles.wordpress.com
The following information from four articles at Wikipedia was deleted
due to it being from the newly blacklisted wordpress site
http://abusearticles.wordpress.com . This site provided information
from mainstream newspapers and court documents showing evidence that
abuse had occurred in these cases.
These included information deleted from the Fells Acres Case article,
the McMartin Preschool Trial case article, from the from Day Care Sex
abuse cases and from the Wenatchee sex ring article.
Other articles have also had balancing information deleted from them.
http://ritualabuse.us/ritualabuse/articles/ritualabuse-us-blacklisted-by-wikipedia/
Wikipedia "Satanic Ritual Abuse" article critique
November 8, 2008
Intimidation, bullying, sarcasm: such are the tactics used by the
current editors of Wikipedia's "Satanic Ritual Abuse" article (and
other related articles): (1) discounting the existence of sexual
crimes against children associated with true or staged satanic
worship; and (2) undoing references in Wikipedia articles by editors
who present findings from research and legal cases that support the
existence of ritual/sexual crimes against children by organized groups
of pedophiles.
http://ritualabuse.us/ritualabuse/articles/press-release-wikipedia-satanic-ritual-abuse-article-critique/
The Truth about Satanic Ritual Abuse
A Rebuttal to Wikipedia's Portrayal of Satanic Ritual Abuse
November 2, 2008 By Wanda Karriker, PhD
Satanic Ritual Abuse (SRA) is NOT a moral panic.
SRA is a subset of Ritual Abuse (RA).
(The article cites several studies proving the existence of ritual
abuse as a phenomenon.)
http://ritualabuse.us/ritualabuse/articles/the-truth-about-satanic-ritual-abuse/
There are many sources on the Internet proving the existence of ritual
abuse crimes.
These include:
http://ritualabuse.us/ritualabuse/
http://ritualabuse.us/ritualabuse/studies/satanic-ritual-abuse-evidence-with-information-on-the-mcmartin-preschool-case/
http://childabusewiki.org/index.php?title=Ritual_Abuse
ritualabuse.us blacklisted by wikipedia
Wikipedia has blacklisted four websites that describe ritual child
abuse and extreme child abuse crimes in detail. These sites are:
http://extreme-abuse-survey.net , http://ritualabuse.us ,
http://www.endritualabuse.org and http://abusearticles.wordpress.com
These sites contain journal articles and news accounts of these
crimes. These websites are perfectly fine websites with accurate legal
information with a variety of scientific studies and news articles. It
appears that no pages in wikipedia will be allowed to have any links
to these sites.
edited release from endritualabuse.org on their site being blacklisted
http://endritualabuse.org/activism/wikipedia-blacklisted-four-important-websites/
Wikipedia Blacklisted Four Important Websites on Ritual Abuse on July
18, 2009
By Ellen P. Lacter, Ph.D.
(Date of this article is July 27, 2009)
On July 18, 2009, at about 9:30pm Pacific time, Wikipedia blacklisted
the following important websites on ritual abuse:
http://abusearticles.wordpress.com
http://extreme-abuse-survey.net
http://ritualabuse.us
http://endritualabuse.org
My website is endritualabuse.org
I have attempted to get information from Wikipedia on why my website
was blacklisted and to get it de-blacklisted. I have been stonewalled
on both counts.
Since February, 2008, on Wikipedia's page on "Satanic Ritual Abuse,"
Wikipedia's staff has been suppressing and deleting credible posts
from credible sources (including my posts- I am a licensed California
psychologist) that have documented substantial criminal and
psychological evidence of criminal ritual abuse, and instead has
completely discounted the existence of ritual abuse. As of July 27,
2009, Wikipedia's page on "Satanic ritual abuse" begins as follows:
"Satanic ritual abuse (SRA, sometimes known as ritual abuse,
ritualistic abuse, organised abuse, sadistic abuse and other variants)
refers to a moral panic that originated in the United States in the
1980s, spreading throughout the country and eventually to many parts
of the world, before subsiding in the late 1990s."
Wikipedia has now escalated its censorship of all information
supporting the existence of ritual abuse by blacklisting four
important websites about ritual abuse on July 18, 2009….
An account of my correspondence with Wikipedia on this matter is
pasted in below.
This correspondence clearly demonstrates that Wikipedia has
stonewalled my polite attempts to communicate with them on this issue.
When I persisted, Wikipedia directed me to send a letter via
registered mail to the Wikimedia Foundation for comment,
Wikimedia Foundation Inc.
P.O. Box 78350
San Francisco, CA 94107-8350 USA
However, when Wanda Karriker, Ph.D., on October 15, 2008, sent a
registered letter to Wikipedia concerning Wikipedia's treatment of the
subject of ritual abuse, she received no response. I also include the
correspondence by Dr. Karriker below.
Dr. Karriker is one of four authors of the Extreme Abuse Survey. The
website for the Extreme Abuse Survey, extreme-abuse-survey.net, is one
of the four websites that Wikipedia blacklisted on July 18, 2009.
It is clear that Wikipedia refuses to consider any documentation
about the existence of ritual abuse.
Wikipedia claims that its mission is: "The mission of the Wikimedia
Foundation is to empower and engage people around the world to collect
and develop educational content under a free license or in the public
domain, and to disseminate it effectively and globally."
Wikipedia claims that its vision is: "Imagine a world in which every
single human being can freely share in the sum of all knowledge.
That's our commitment."
I find these claims by Wikipedia to be untrue, based on its censorship
of the evidence of ritual abuse….I deem Wikipedia to be irresponsible,
unethical, and to be in violation of its own statutes.
I urge individuals and organizations to disseminate this article,
including freely re-posting it to other websites, with the condition
that it be posted in its entirety with nothing added or removed from
the article .
Ellen P. Lacter, Ph.D., Licensed Psychologist in California, USA
blacklisting and deleting important information from wikipedia
http://abusearticles.wordpress.com
The following information from four articles at wikipedia was deleted
due to it being from the newly blacklisted wordpress site (
http://abusearticles.wordpress.com ) . This site provided information
from mainstream newspapers and court documents showing evidence that
abuse had occurred in these cases.
deleted from Fells Acres Case article
All nine children testified in a broadly consistent way…The children
testified to numerous instances of sexual abuse. Some of the children
testified that they were photographed during this abuse, describing a
big camera with wires, a red button, and pictures which came out of
the camera. The children testified that the defendant threatened them
and told them that their families would be harmed if they told anyone
about the abuse….The Commonwealth also presented a pediatric
gynecologist and pediatrician who examined five of the girls who
testified…She made findings consistent with abuse in four of the girls.
[5]
The motion judge who heard Violet and Cheryl's motion, declared that
"[a]t best, the defendants could only see the right ear and a part of
the right cheek of the testifying witness." The Commonwealth contends
that the defendants could see almost a full profile view including the
child's lips and that the child witness could make eye contact by
turning toward the defendants.[5]
Commonweath v. Amirault, Middlesex, 424 Mass. 618
http://abusearticles.files.wordpress.com/2007/12/common-vs-amirault-424-mass-618-page-624.jpg
deleted from McMartin Preschool Trial case article
One source stated that a hospital exam confirmed he was sodomized,
and that he named a teacher at the school as the perpetrator.
Tamarkin, Civia (1994). "Investigative Issues in Ritual Abuse Cases,
Part I and Part II". Treating Abuse Today.
http://abusearticles.wordpress.com/2007/12/02/investigative-issues-in-ritual-abuse-cases-part-1-and-2-1994/
deleted from Day Care Sex abuse cases
(Fells Acres case)
All nine children testified in a broadly consistent way…The children
testified to numerous instances of sexual abuse…The children testified
that the defendant threatened them and told them that their families
would be harmed if they told anyone about the abuse"
"Commonweath v. Amirault, Middlesex" 424 Mass. 618.
http://abusearticles.files.wordpress.com/2007/12/common-vs-amirault-424-mass-618-page-624.jpg
http://abusearticles.wordpress.com/category/commonwealth-vs-amirault/
(Wenatchee Sex Ring)
Dr. Deborah Harper testified in the trial "One girl showed definite
medical signs of sexual abuse and it could not be ruled out for two
others."
"Doctor confirms abuse in sex-ring case." Associated Press.
1996-12-05. http://abusearticles.wordpress.com/category/articles-on-wenatchee/
. "One girl showed definite medical signs of sexual abuse and it could
not be ruled for two others, a defense witness testified…in the child
rape and molestation trial of a Pentecostal preacher and his wife …
Prosecutors allege unordained pastor Robert "Roby" Roberson and his
wife, Connie, has sex with children at the East Wenatchee Pentecostal
Church of God House and Prayer and at their home."
http://abusearticles.wordpress.com/category/articles-on-wenatchee/
deleted from Wenatchee sex ring article
During the trial, a defense witness stated that one girl showed
"definite medical signs of sexual abuse" while "it could not be ruled
out for two others. "Doctor confirms abuse in sex-ring case."
Associated Press http://abusearticles.wordpress.com/category/articles-on-wenatchee/
. "One girl showed definite medical signs of sexual abuse and it could
not be ruled for two others, a defense witness testified … in the
child rape and molestation trial of a Pentacostal preacher and his
wife … Prosecutors allege unordained pastor Robert "Roby" Roberson and
his wife, Connie, has sex with children at the East Wenatchee
Pentacostal Church of God House and Prayer and at their home."
A U.S. Department of Justice investigation also found that there was
no evidence of civil rights violations. Consultant finds no fault in
sex ring probe" Associated Press in Tri-City Herald. February 22,
1996. http://abusearticles.wordpress.com/category/articles-on-wenatchee/
. "A consultant hired by the city's insurer to look into the way
Wenatchee police conducted child sex-abuse investigations said
Wednesday the cases were properly handled."
==============================================================================
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "misc.kids"
group.
To post to this group, visit http://groups.google.com/group/misc.kids?hl=en
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to misc.kids+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
To change the way you get mail from this group, visit:
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.kids/subscribe?hl=en
To report abuse, send email explaining the problem to abuse@googlegroups.com
==============================================================================
Google Groups: http://groups.google.com/?hl=en
0 التعليقات:
Post a Comment