Tag(s): ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; (more...) ; ; , Add Tags  (less...)
Add to My Group(s)

View Ratings | Rate It

Permalink
View Article Stats      (19 comments)

When The State Attacks (FLDS Raid)

Add this Page to Facebook!
Submit to Twitter
Submit to Reddit
Submit to Stumble Upon

Tell A Friend
Get Embed HTML Code
By Mumia Abu-Jamal  Posted by Hans Bennett (about the submitter)

Become a Fan Become a Fan  (1 fan)   -- Page 1 of 1 page(s)

opednews.com

 
 
[col. writ. 5/24/08] (c) '08 Mumia Abu-Jamal
 
 
    The early April raid on the homes and headquarters of the Eldorado, Texas-based branch of the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (FLDS) on sexual abuse charges, has always struck me as a foul, prejudicial and a stark example of governmental overreach.
 
    In conversations with other guys on Death Row, I opined that the raid lacked probable cause, as it was based on reports that weren't substantiated.
 
    The recent Texas appellate court decision reversing the lower court actually went a good deal farther, ruling that the grounds for the raid offered by the government were "legally and factually insufficient", and that there was no evidence of immediate danger of sexual abuse.  Some children have since been returned to their mothers.
 
    The El Dorado raid, which resulted in the stat's seizure of some 450 children, was as much a paramilitary attack as a legal one, and it brought to mind the infamous raids on the MOVE house on May 13th, 1985, and Waco, Texas on the Branch Davidians on April 19th, 1993, both of which led to great loss of life, and which were based on state lies and exaggerations.
 
    What was almost more remarkable than the raids, though, was the muted responses, and the nature of them, as well.
 
    On a popular women's talk program, discussion centered more on the mothers' weird hairdos and their conservative long dresses, than the sheer injustice of the state separating 450 children from their parents and their brothers and sisters.
 
    It revealed how the State can isolate and attack those seen as different, with the support of the corporate media.
 
    While I'm no fan of polygamy, and definitely oppose the sexual abuse of anybody, I don't recall any kind of similar raids on Catholic churches or parish houses, where the abuse of kids happened for generations, and was, if anything, an open secret.
 
    The Mormons formally rejected polygamy (until then a central tenet of their faith), in 1890 in part as the price of joining the Union as the state of Utah (it was formerly named the State of Deseret).  It's not surprising that some Mormon families would hold to their beliefs, and reject the official line.
 
    But in the name of protecting children, Texas caused immense trauma to hundreds of innocent mothers, innocent fathers, and innocent children.  For what can be more traumatic than to snatch a nursing infant from her mother's breast?
 
    What can be more traumatic that separating a mother from her child? Or father from wife and children? Or what of brothers from sisters?
 
    States do this every day, because they have the power to do so, but to quote MOVE's John Africa, " Just because it's legal, don't make it right."
 
-(c) '08 maj

 

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author
and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.

Contact Editor

 

Share this page: (what's this?)                   Tell a Friend: Tell A Friend

Add this Page to Facebook!      Submit to Stumble Upon      Submit to Reddit      Add This Page to Mr Wong!           NEWSVINE      DEl.ICIO.US      Looksmart Furl      My Web      Blink List     (More...)

Comments

The time limit for entering new comments on this article has expired.

This limit can be removed. Our paid membership program is designed to give you many benefits, such as removing this time limit. To learn more, please click here.

Comments: Expand   Shrink   Hide  
19 comments
To view all comments:
Expand Comments
(Or you can set your preferences to show all comments, always)

innocent fathers? by John R Moffett on Sunday, Jun 1, 2008 at 9:39:25 AM
Really? by Rev. Robert Vinciguerra on Monday, Jun 2, 2008 at 12:44:31 AM
Guilty monsters by Michael Collins on Monday, Jun 2, 2008 at 6:44:56 AM
When the raid went public by Stanimal on Sunday, Jun 1, 2008 at 1:46:00 PM
Face the reality! by Pappy on Sunday, Jun 1, 2008 at 5:55:45 PM
Brainwashing at its ugliest by Jay Farrington on Sunday, Jun 1, 2008 at 10:30:31 PM
Dangerous grouping. by Gallaher on Monday, Jun 2, 2008 at 12:23:29 AM
Why the State attacked them but not Catholic churches by Mars Caulton on Monday, Jun 2, 2008 at 1:06:27 AM
Let me understand this by Michael Collins on Monday, Jun 2, 2008 at 7:01:14 AM
Speaking of which... by Hans Bennett on Monday, Jun 2, 2008 at 4:24:38 AM
Removal of the cihldren was entirely justified by Michael Collins on Monday, Jun 2, 2008 at 6:34:55 AM
Hogwash. by Kathlyn Stone on Monday, Jun 2, 2008 at 8:04:16 AM
Religious Persecution in the Name of "Protecting Children" by Richard Wise on Monday, Jun 2, 2008 at 8:54:09 AM
I suppose you think that Aztecs would bepersecuted too by Michael Collins on Monday, Jun 2, 2008 at 1:20:32 PM
Mike, this is enlightening, in a depressing sort of way. by Kathlyn Stone on Monday, Jun 2, 2008 at 1:53:00 PM
There are a lot of "protectionists" including Mumia by Michael Collins on Monday, Jun 2, 2008 at 7:03:54 PM
speaking too soon. by Pappy on Tuesday, Jun 3, 2008 at 12:02:36 AM
Go Government! by Gallaher on Monday, Jun 2, 2008 at 5:19:03 PM
Let's Not Confuse the Issues by Richard Wise on Wednesday, Jun 4, 2008 at 1:06:40 PM