Treatment Abuse, Behavior Modification, Thought Reform > News Items

Earth Services / The House Next Door

<< < (7/10) > >>

wdtony:

--- Quote from: "wdtony" ---Petition creator: Susan Lynn Gillihan

Her website:

http://miparentalrights.ning.com/profile/SusanGillihan

Personal info:

Phone: 269-721-3313 Dowling Michigan   Age: 50

Upcoming event at the courthouse for Michael Terpening:  http://miparentalrights.ning.com/events ... -terpening
--- End quote ---


It's ironic that this woman is fighting for parent's rights and we are fighting for children's rights.

Ursus:
Comments left for the above article, "Accused molester denied more kid time" (by Ken Kolker, 06 Sep 2011, WOOD-TV8), #s 21-40:


Amy Partanen · Works at Childcare Provider · September 6, 2011 at 5:21pm
VERY WELL PUT GUEST CHECKS!!!Pete Moss · GED · September 6, 2011 at 5:28pm
the first article about this described an alledged sexual text message that the guy sent to a male coworker about fifty dollars for a sex act and other coworkers claim to have seen this text message; I don't necessarily find anything "fishy" about the courts attempting to terminate his parental rights, there must be some reason behind that, and keep in mind that, if there is suspicion that something has taken place in the home, its not going to be released to the public so that minors aren't identifiedDenise Hall · September 6, 2011 at 6:03pm
Obviously everyone is overlooking the fact that this man INNOCENT until proven guilty. And for the state to petition to have his parental rights terminated before he's even convicted? THAT is a HUGE problem! CPS and the state has already convicted him - no matter what happens in court! Do any of you NOT see where this could be a cause for concern?! I can see restricting his parenting time and not unsupervised time because of the nature of the case. I have no issues with that. I take issues with the state trying to terminated his parental rights when it has been said stated repeatedly that none of these charges involve his own children!

I really hope NONE of you ever have the nightmare of being railroaded by CPS - all because they have the power and they can.Kate Stevens Chandler · Kalamazoo, Michigan · September 6, 2011 at 6:23pm
Denise they involve somebodys kids which puts his kids at risk. They have more than the press has put out to the public,the state DOES NOT TERMINATE OR EVEN PUT IT OUT THERE UNLESS THEY HAVE SOMETHING ON THIS GUY. COME ON PEOPLE WAKE UP!Mike Boerman · Top Commenter · Langston, Michigan · September 6, 2011 at 6:25pm
"@DJ Michael - the kids were 5 and 8, not teenagers. But don't let the facts get in the way. And there need only be a preponderance of the evidence for civil court."

@Sue Weaver: here's how I know you're full of sh1t...the article above states the accusers are all in their LATE TEENS, not ages 5 and 8, so nice try there *lol* Quit pretending to be this phony insider with some secret knowledge about the case that the rest of us don't have - you're just an ordinary armchair critic like the rest of us :p Red Thenews · Top Commenter · Grocery Cart Wrangler at Ralphs Market · September 6, 2011 at 6:26pm
To be honest, I would not be surprised if this man is found innocent. I just got a feeling the allegations are lies.Denise Hall · September 6, 2011 at 6:27pm
Kate, I understand they are someone else's kids, but to TERMINATE his parental rights BEFORE this has even gone to trial - where he could be found INNOCENT! Seriously?!Denise Hall · September 6, 2011 at 6:29pm
And Kate - the state terminates parental rights ALL THE TIME! They also removed children from homes on 'suspicions' of what 'might' happen and yet other children DIE because they REFUSE to act or even do their job and show up at the homes! Sorry if I just automatically believe everything they say.Pete Moss · GED · September 6, 2011 at 6:31pm
none of the charges involve his children (that is, at this time); maybe his own children are still being evaluated; maybe there is reason to believe that one or more of his own children have been abused, which we (the public, the media) would not have access to that information in order to protect the privacy of the child or children involved; when protective services does their job, people are complaining, and when they let cases slide, people complain; I guess I'd rather see this case done a "better safe than sorry" scale; my guess is that, these accusers didn't meet at the local McDonalds and plan this all up, my guess is that DHS saw some correlation in the accusers' testimony that made the allegations believable; also, the childrens' own attorney was against this guy getting more parenting time; I have to give DHS the benefit of the doubt on this onePete Moss · GED · September 6, 2011 at 7:08pm
not as easy to terminate a parent's rights as some may think
(3) The court may terminate a parent's parental rights to a child if the court finds, by clear and convincing evidence, 1 or more of the following:
(b) The child or a sibling of the child has suffered physical injury or physical or sexual abuse under 1 or more of the following circumstances:
(i) The parent's act caused the physical injury or physical or sexual abuse and the court finds that there is a reasonable likelihood that the child will suffer from injury or abuse in the foreseeable future if placed in the parent's home.
(ii) The parent who had the opportunity to prevent the physical injury or physical or sexual abuse failed to do so and the court finds that there is a reasonable likelihood that the child will suffer injury or abuse in the foreseeable future if placed in the parent's home.
(iii) A nonparent adult's act caused the physical injury or physical or sexual abuse and the court finds that there is a reasonable likelihood that the child will suffer from injury or abuse by the nonparent adult in the foreseeable future if placed in the parent's home.
again, what have his own children possibly been through that cannot be disclosed to the public in order to protect his children?Denise Hall · September 6, 2011 at 7:29pm
Pete, they aren't trying to terminate the mother's rights. And according to all of the articles I have read, NONE of the charges involve ANY of his children. They have NOTHING to go to terminate his rights. Like I said, until the trial is concluded and the verdict is read, I COMPLETELY agree with supervised visitation only for him and NOT in the family home. But termination before this has even gone to trial? Really?Amy Partanen · Works at Childcare Provider · September 6, 2011 at 7:33pm
Denise they did not terminate his rights!! if they did he would not have been given supervised visits at the dhs...mean while there are 11 counts..they did not come up with 11 counts by just pulling a number out of a hat. I am sure they had to interview and interview and interview more and more..cps does not like to take children away from parents or keep them away. They give every chance they can to try to keep the parents with the kids they give parents chance after chance. this story only was just now made public im sure this has been going on way longer then just now. also, I agree the better safe then sorry..someone has to look out for the children other then that does he really need to be home where the media can camp out on his lawn and watch everymove that his children do? I am sorry but you want to play that he is not guilty till trial..while everyone is saying that they are also saying other people kids, or young adults are liers..they also are being judged at the same time this man is. They were all removed from a place they thought they could call home also. They were placed in this mans care to be protected, something happen for the state to feel like this man did not do his job or they would not have shut this house down. there are two sides to this story and you cant say one is guilty with out saying the other one is not..both sides should be heard and taken into consideration meanwhile the best thing for his kids is to remove him untill this can get figured out. no matter what way you look at this SOMEONE'S CHILDREN are going to be hurt or have been hurt already..and no matter what way you look at this people lifes have and will continue to be affected!!Amy Partanen · Works at Childcare Provider · September 6, 2011 at 7:35pm
and Denise, children die sometimes because they do not speak up and no one knows what happens behind them doors..these children spoke up and they are being looked down at because they spoke upKate Stevens Chandler · Kalamazoo, Michigan · September 6, 2011 at 7:41pm
Denise what exactly is your point? I know the process ive been through removal of a preditor to protect my other children they didnt keep me from my kids ever so denise there is something eLse going on and the courts know more than the public does obviously. Wake upAmy Partanen · Works at Childcare Provider · September 6, 2011 at 7:45pm
who says this is going to have a trial?? not all cases go to trial.Guest Checks · Comstock Park, Michigan · September 6, 2011 at 7:57pm
I am not sure I would call WOOD's reporting accurate. It is entirely weird to try and terminate one parent's rights while leaving the other parent's rights in tact. The last quote says, ""He's exploiting his children, as is his wife, by allowing their pictures to be put on YouTube videos and broadcast to the world."

As someone whose made plenty of reports over the years one thing people do not realize is one aspect of abuse is, "abuse by act of omission" or the failure to protect. A neglect petition starts a process, it is going to court to ask the court to take jurisdiction. It is highly unusual to start that process by asking for termination of rights, it is far more unusual to target one parent if the other is actively assisting the other contrary to the interests of the children. Either way the termination hearing would be about 6 months down the road.

Having said that keep in mind child abuse is both a civil issue and separately a criminal issue. These are literally two independent investigations. The allegations he abused these boys are resolved where CPS (DHS) is concerned.

The other piece of this is we have to keep in mind this is not a new situation. This investigation could have been going on for months before the criminal charges were filed. There are lots of people involved and these kids have been vetted over and over.

It is extremely early in this process and most times you are going to see a guilty plea. Whatever the case, it is time to make sure all kids are protected out of an abundance of caution. There are no winners, there are and will be, only losers. His kids are going to be hurt no matter what happens. If he did what he is accused of, his arrest is still pretty recent and he is going to need some time to process how serious this situation is.

If he is guilty he's had great power over people's lives. Great power to satisfy his urges with the cloak of authority of law right under the noses of MANY people he would have come into contact with who, in theory, should be able recognize the evil consequences of his actions in the behavior of the kids. He made it work, he got away with it and he kept getting away with it...

Now the system that was clueless for God only knows how long has caught on. If he is guilty he thought he got away with it and now the very people he played for fools are reaching into his life and shredding it. Does this alleged monster, who used human beings for his disgusting proclivities, even know how to put his kids first?

If he is guilty, I think we will see a point where reality strikes and he pleads out so he can avoid having to listen to young people recount what he did, how he did it, when he did it, and the very intimate details of his most disgusting secrets.

For my part, a decent man does not allow his lawyer to start out blaming the kids. That is just flailing around trying to warn the victims what is coming if they testify.Steve Ring · September 6, 2011 at 8:01pm
From what I've read, very few of you know little if any about this type of crime. The reason I do, is because it happened to a very close friend of mine. In cases like this one, where a person is accused of a sex crime against a child, no matter what the person is always considered guilty. From that point it's up to him to prove that he's not, not matter what he has to go through. In my Buddies case, his ex-wife accused him of "Touching" his grandson, which there is no way that could have ever happened. But because the child could speak on his own, he was too young to talk, the court took the ex's word for it and now my buddies in prison for the rest of his life. The year before this happened she wanted him to do something for her, but he was going on vacation with his new wife instead, and I remember her telling him "You'll be sorry". I'm sure he is now. These kids don't need proof, this guy needs proof he didn't do it, pure and simple.Denise Hall · September 6, 2011 at 8:09pm
I am awake Kate... And go back and READ the article attached to all these comments. It directly states that NONE of the 11 counts he's charged with involve his children. In this same article it states the State has filed a neglect petition to terminate his parental rights. And Wood isn't the only place I get my news from.

By all of your responses, he has already been found guilty in the court of the public. For this man's sake, I hope that happens. After all, between the media, the courts, his accusers and people like all of you, his life is now forfeit.Amy Partanen · Works at Childcare Provider · September 6, 2011 at 8:11pm
I am willing to bet that this man will plea out to try to get a lesser chargeAmy Partanen · Works at Childcare Provider · September 6, 2011 at 8:17pm
by all your responses you have found him not guilty!! You think its ok that he put his children through more stress then what they are already dealing with.. no one said that he did this to his kids..but if he did do it to others what makes it ok for him to be around any kids..what gives him more rights then all the kids in this story..why should he be found not guilty.. and everyone else is a liar

All content (c) Copyright 2000 - 2012 WOOD Television, Inc.

Ursus:
Comments left for the above article, "Accused molester denied more kid time" (by Ken Kolker, 06 Sep 2011, WOOD-TV8), #s 41-60:


Kate Stevens Chandler · Kalamazoo, Michigan · September 6, 2011 at 8:23pm
Denise you are not awake if you watch the news and get the facts he still has rights for supervised visits why idk i would never let someone around my kidswith 11 counts of csc around My kids but since the kids were later teens in age they are all liars and he is innocent according to you and do you know that they are not still investigating his children i dont know this.so really you are talking off the top of your head and dont know shit about what your talking about.Denise Hall · September 6, 2011 at 8:38pm
Yes he still has supervised visits and if you would have bothered to read what I have now typed at least twice, I agree with that. What I am having a problem with is why the state is petitioning to terminate his parental rights on accusations. This hasn't even gone to trial yet, but the state is gung-ho to damage the kids further than this whole situation already is. What happens if the termination goes through and he's found innocent? What happens to his children then? Despite what people think, he is innocent until PROVEN guilty. But since you are simply unwilling to see anything that I have asked or question - on top of deciding to cuss and be insulting, this conversation with you is over.Guest Checks · Comstock Park, Michigan · September 6, 2011 at 8:53pm
Denise let's look at some of what you say, "And go back and READ the article attached to all these comments. It directly states that NONE of the 11 counts he's charged with involve his children."

First of all we know sex offenders RARELY have one victim. The man is innocent until proven guilty, but that does not mean society takes a roll of the dice with his children and the court ignores what is absolute reality about people who commit crimes of this nature.

Your argument would seem to suggest as long as ones own kids have not spoken up, society is to take a chance.

No thanks.

Second, as I've said before I tend to think the reporting is misleading. The state almost NEVER asks for termination of rights so soon. It is most likely just a neglect case. Anyway terminating rights does require a full blown trial. It does not just happen.

Third, WOOD has not told us what the neglect is. This is also missing. While I am sure it has some relation to the case, it is also likely there is something else in this matter the court will have to take a look at.

What bothers people about your comments is you come off as quite willing to take a chance with the safety and well being of his children. As the responses should tell you, this is offensive to society. We do not want to take a chance with someone's life. The issues are very serious and already life changing for all involved. Right now separation ensures the safety of his kids and that is about the best we can do for these kids.Amy Partanen · Works at Childcare Provider · September 6, 2011 at 8:57pm
you are not even taken into consideration that he might be guilty then what?? and again i have seen two cases that did not make it public that they did not even make it to trial. Not all cases go to trial. The state is just petitioned it takes 6mths to a year if not more for that to go through. no matter what these kids did not just call the cops and say hey charge this man will 11 counts because we said so..My ex brother in law said he did not do it either but he took a plea..so does that make in not guilty cause he did not get a trail?? we will just have to seet happens but I am sorry Denise you are not being open minded or fair..you must be some how a family member if not maybe you should get this guy some help he needs you seem to know the ins and outs of what is right and wrong for eveyone involved..there is a process that has to be done. no matter if you or I or kate agrees if you dont like it..call your state rep. im sure cps has other things they could focus on and they are not just making this to make a whole familys life hell..they are not monstersAmy Partanen · Works at Childcare Provider · September 6, 2011 at 9:03pm
sorry for the mistakes..this is just stupid that no one cares about the children all of them..at this point if i was the mom to these kids I would do everything to protect them from seeing the tv or news and other people i would not post pictures so people can see them and know who they are and bother them...its all about protecting the children right now till this can be figured out no matter if he did it or not..they still need to be protectedGuest Checks · Comstock Park, Michigan · September 6, 2011 at 9:22pm
I think you get it pretty right, Amy. This is one of those awful crisis in a marriage, a parent has to choose between a spouse or the children. It is fine to support the husband, but now she has the lawyers questioning how she is using the kid's images online to help the father. The last thing this mother needs is CPS coming at her for failing to protect the kids; and God help her if she does not follow the court order.

And where in the hell is their lawyer on this petition crap and going public? Sure, go to the hearings, but getting their mugs on TV? Do they really think that is going to sway a potential jury in conservative Barry County? More likely it irks anyone who sees it because that is not how we do it in America when someone is accused of a crime. It smacks of manipulation.

Not to mention the dumb comment from the lawyer about these kids being felons and delinquents. He should be saving it for the trial. He may think he gets a benefit in intimidating these kids from testifying, and while the prosecution is surely preparing them for the worst, they've got this clown on video and the prosecution can show them exactly what to expect and how to handle it.

This is a bad situation all the way around, and no matter how it ends it ends bad for everyone. The mother better do what the Court says and let the process work its way.Mary Rolfe · Top Commenter · September 6, 2011 at 10:15pm
I just have a couple of things to say; first is State of Michigan, you need to do a better job of screening someone who claims to run a home for abused, neglected or special needs children............or any children for that matter. What was his training and background that made him qualified to run a home for children with these issues? Is he licensed? It is the taxpayer after alll who is paying him.

Second, I can understand the need to be sure all his visits with his children are only of the supervised kind. The court needs to be sure this man is not trying to manipulate his own kids or suggest or coerce certain answers from them when they testify in court. And, just because his children have mada complaints of him molesting them, it does not mean he hasn't. Those children need to be safe too.Guest Checks · Comstock Park, Michigan · September 7, 2011 at 3:06am
Mary, I wish people like you would get a clue. Juts what should the State of Michigan do? Do you think these people are easy to find? A little extra training and it will all be okay?Becky Swartzenegger · Top Commenter · September 7, 2011 at 4:03am
Amy, you know what people mean by having the right to a fair trial. Not every case goes to trial because the suspects take plea deals, guilty or not because they are much better than what could result from a trial. That is up to them! Not the court! If they didnt want to take the plea, they didnt have to! They were given their rights! This man has not been given his rights. He is guilty until proven innocent.Pete Moss · GED · September 7, 2011 at 4:36am
Denise, you don't know that DHS has nothing to go on to terminate his rights because those details would NOT be made available to the public because it would involve identifying the children; and the mother better be careful in putting out youtube videos on the matter before she finds herself in the same boatGuest Checks · Comstock Park, Michigan · September 7, 2011 at 5:26am
Becky we can see you are pro-child molester. Now please stop it. The man has his rights and the state of Michigan is going to protect children from him until this case is over, as it should.Amy Partanen · Works at Childcare Provider · September 7, 2011 at 6:50am
Yes Becky I know what it means..I also know what it will mean for this family. because to get to a guilty or not guilty they have to go through ever last gross and nasty detail of what happen or what the kids said this man did to him. Do you really think he will be cleared of all 11 counts..thats a pretty big number?? I really dont think the dhs and cps said lets pick on this family. I think they have a job to do and they have to protect his kids. I dont think they pulled the number 11 out of a hat and say yup that will do!! also this man does have rights, I never said he did not, but the kids that say he hurt them, they also have rights to..and this mans children should not be used as pawns to show how loving and sweet he is or to prove is innocence either..they should be protected from this..no matter if this man is guilty or not..THANK YOU GUEST CHECKS!! VERY WELL SAID!!Guest Checks · Comstock Park, Michigan · September 7, 2011 at 7:28am
Amy you are exactly right. Serious charges have been brought, and we have to keep in mind the Child Abuse Investigation is already done and decided. While those are not criminal charges he is in the Child Abuse Registry and the Family Court now takes up what happens next, separately from the criminal charges. He will get his due process.

However, the state cannot simply ignore these allegations and refuse to take steps to protect any child who may come into contact with this man while he is out on bail. This is awful for everyone involved, but protecting the kids comes first.Mike Solstice · Top Commenter · C.E.O. at Fedora Prime LLC · September 7, 2011 at 10:25am
My name is Mike Solstice, I am the producer of the YouTube video in question. Prior to this case being brought to my attention over Facebook, I did not know Michael or any of the Terpenings. The pictures used in the video were downloaded from various albums publicly available on Facebook. No one asked me to make this video, nor was it made on anyone else's behalf, just my own - to express my own outrage at what is happening here & to help fight for a better system. Ignorant news stories like this one just fuel my fire; there's this little thing called "FACT CHECKING" - it's obviously something the Michigan Media, as well as your joke of a Human Services Department could learn a little something about.Kate Stevens Chandler · Kalamazoo, Michigan · September 7, 2011 at 10:42am
Denise for your benefit i will type slowly and clearly i am here to tell you from personal experiance the state would NEVER EVER EVER PETITION TO TERMINATE WITHOUT CONCRETE EVIDENCE YOU ARE BEING IGNORANT ABOUT THESE KIDS THEY NEED TO PROTECTED JUST LIKE. AMY AND GUEST CHECK STATED you on the other hand would like them to be pitched into the ring of fire you know nothing about the laws of termination if you did you would know termination does not give the public information on minors did you know when the foster kids and the kids in the house next doors rights were terminated no they were minorsKate Stevens Chandler · Kalamazoo, Michigan · September 7, 2011 at 10:49am
SO denise when you learn your facts and really figure out who should be protected definately not the kids in your eyes) then have at it but do the research and look up some laws check the centerAl registery for neglect and abuse cases otherwise just keep it buttoned and feed your bs To somebody who wants to read your load of dodo. GET A CLUE DENISEKate Stevens Chandler · Kalamazoo, Michigan · September 7, 2011 at 10:51am
WELL PUT GUEST CHECK SUSAN YOU REALLY HAVE NO CLUE ABOUT WHAT THE STATE SPENDS ON THESE KIDS TANF IS USED AS A LAST RESORTJamie Moore · September 7, 2011 at 1:46pm
The Terpenings are my family...I also worked with these people making the accusations..I also reside in barry county these allegations are LIES one has recanted and before anyone spouts offthat the state police say he recanted his recantation..this person hasn't spoken to state police since he recanted..know the facts Susan and Mike Solstice do know the facts..the children of Michael and Amanda are NOT NUMBERS THEY ARE NOT A BONUS for dhs's pocket this is a LOVING FAMILY.Guest Checks · Comstock Park, Michigan · September 7, 2011 at 2:30pm
Jamie, I've worked with many people in placements for kids just like this. I worked in a large placement and was shocked the first time a co-worker was accused.

Part of the problem is you are not being honest. You cannot know the truth. A sex offender would not invite you to witness his behaviors.

DHS does not want this and you lose ALL credibility when you rely on the conspiracy nonsense. DHS would be far happier having a safe place for these kids than having to remove the kids and arrest this man.

It is almost beyond belief that 5 kids would just make up these allegations. If you worked with these kids you would know the agony of sexual abuse. You would know how hard it is for young people, especially boys, to come forward. You would know there are far more people involved than the state police, and you would know enough to know you cannot possibly know what went on behind closed doors.

Frankly, my hunch is you are getting duped by this defendant and his manipulation. By law, by the Constitution for that matter, he cam compel the appearance of witnesses. If the family was smart they would keep their yaps closed about so called recanting of stories. What could be better for Mr. Terpening than a witness appearing in Court telling everyone it did not happen? It would make for reasonable doubt on those charges and bring into question the other charges.

However, his loud mouth lawyer stuck his face out to the camera and made stupid comments about the history of these kids. Smart move, ace. Got on TV and send the message you are going to tear these kids down. If there was an actual recanting I sure would want to be that kid's best friend if I were Mr. Terpening's lawyer.

To me what I've seen from the family is a desire to sabotage the process of resolving these allegations through the courts. DUMB MOVE.

Still we will wait and see.Pete Moss · GED · September 7, 2011 at 3:01pm
while the Terpening family may have seemed "loving" "normal" and all of that, its important to remember that child molesters don't wear signs and also remember how we've been told that "it could be the guy next door;" remember the shock of learning how many Catholic priests had sexually abused young boys?
if Mrs. Terpening didn't post the youtube video of their children, and, had no knowledge of it, what action has she taken against the person who posted it?
I think some of you think that his parental rights have been requested to be terminated based on these allegations, which isn't the case; there has been an investigation people, and there are likely alot of details of that investigation that have been sealed under court order and not available to the public; there isn't just one allegation from some troubled kid with a history of lying, there are FOUR allegations with a possible FIFTH, all by males, and males generally don't want that "label" of having been molested, so the fact that five males have made this same claim, well, that says alot
and what is 32 year old doing with EIGHT KIDS?

All content (c) Copyright 2000 - 2012 WOOD Television, Inc.

Ursus:

--- Quote from: "wdtony" ---It's ironic that [Susan Lynn Gillihan] is fighting for parent's rights and we are fighting for children's rights.
--- End quote ---
Personally, I think one of the primary goals of programs is to behaviorally modify citizens to be more in line and sympathy with both corporate and government interests. This is not necessarily in the best interests of said citizens.

On the face of it, both parents' rights organizations and children's rights organizations are advocating on the part of citizens (as opposed to big binnis and big gov). However, and certainly historically, parents' rights organizations have often been co-opted by the pro-program agenda.

That said, many children's rights organizations have also been thus co-opted.

wdtony:

--- Quote from: "Ursus" ---
--- Quote from: "wdtony" ---It's ironic that [Susan Lynn Gillihan] is fighting for parent's rights and we are fighting for children's rights.
--- End quote ---
Personally, I think one of the primary goals of programs is to behaviorally modify citizens to be more in line and sympathy with both corporate and government interests. This is not necessarily in the best interests of said citizens.

On the face of it, both parents' rights organizations and children's rights organizations are advocating on the part of citizens (as opposed to big binnis and big gov). However, and certainly historically, parents' rights organizations have often been co-opted by the pro-program agenda.

That said, many children's rights organizations have also been thus co-opted.
--- End quote ---

The explosion of prescribing psychiatric medications for disorders that were actually normal human experiences. I remember when depression became the new way out for people right before the 1990. Everyone, including myself, felt a huge sense of relief. This is because now doctors and pharmaceutical companies were telling us that it wasn't our fault.

I mean, wow.... just take a pill and it's not my fault. That was huge. And every parent jumped on the bandwagon. Who wanted to be responsible for themselves anyway? Then the kids were diagnosed with mental disorders and even more relief came over the masses of people who felt behind the 8 ball.

Fast forward to today, these drugs are on every channel, every day. I saw 2 commercials today where drugs were advertised as a second drug to aid children if the first drug wasn't working. Now we are speedballing kids?

How is this the government's fault? Well, it is big business that drives this crazy train down the tracks, but if it weren't for the money pumped into Washington, regulations might tighten up to protect citizens. The government gets another benefit from all of this...more controllable population dependent upon one more thing: drugs. Ironic that a drug is only bad if no profit is had. Pills making great money are "allowed". My friend Tim would call this an, "Allowed Cloud". The profits are almost unimaginable.

I think this is a bigger issue though. The issue of how so many people can be fooled based on peer beliefs and propaganda.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page