| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"J Young" |
| Date: |
13 Sep 2007 11:11:41 AM |
| Object: |
Brooklyn Rabbi Faces New Child Molestation Charge |
This is one that Yang may have missed.
http://wcbstv.com/topstories/local_story_256102103.html
Brooklyn Rabbi Faces New Child Molestation Charge
(CBS/AP) BROOKLYN A rabbi of an all-boys Orthodox school who has been
charged with sexually abusing two students is accused of fondling a
third.
Rabbi Yehuda Kolko faced a Brooklyn judge Thursday on new charges of
sex abuse and child endangerment. He is accused of molesting a first-
grader in 2005 at the Yeshiva-Mesivta Torah Temimah, where he worked
for several years.
Kolko's attorney, calling the case against his client weak, said the
charges stemmed from an angry student who had it in for the 61-year-
old rabbi. The attorney also criticized the high bail set by the
judge, $50,000 bond or $25,000 cash.
The rabbi's wife posted the cash bail and Kolko was released
Thursday.
Kolko had already been free on $5,000 bail, awaiting trial on charges
he sexually abused two young students, one decades ago and one more
recently.
.
|
|
| User: "Scruffy McScruffovitch" |
|
| Title: Re: Brooklyn Rabbi Faces New Child Molestation Charge |
13 Sep 2007 11:21:21 AM |
|
|
"J Young" <younginsights@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1189699901.764865.8680@y42g2000hsy.googlegroups.com...
This is one that Yang may have missed.
http://wcbstv.com/topstories/local_story_256102103.html
Brooklyn Rabbi Faces New Child Molestation Charge
(CBS/AP) BROOKLYN A rabbi of an all-boys Orthodox school who has been
charged with sexually abusing two students is accused of fondling a
third.
Two, and fondling a third, and no mention of the Jewish leadership
transferring him to prevent his prosecution, and no mention of the Jewish
Church hiding him or sending him to "rehabilitation clinics" to prevent his
prosectution, and no mention of the Jewish leadership otherwise interfering
with the jobs of law enforcement. The story of a Rabbi child predator is
certainly a horrible story. A story of DOZENS of Priest child predators
that was implicitely supported and protected by the church to the extent
that they managed to accumulate up to, and sometimes over a hundred victimes
over a decades long career is beyond horrible.
This is a difference that you will never recognize in your blindness.
.
|
|
|
| User: "No One" |
|
| Title: Re: Brooklyn Rabbi Faces New Child Molestation Charge |
13 Sep 2007 05:05:48 PM |
|
|
"Scruffy McScruffovitch" <Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> writes:
"J Young" <younginsights@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1189699901.764865.8680@y42g2000hsy.googlegroups.com...
This is one that Yang may have missed.
http://wcbstv.com/topstories/local_story_256102103.html
Brooklyn Rabbi Faces New Child Molestation Charge
(CBS/AP) BROOKLYN A rabbi of an all-boys Orthodox school who has been
charged with sexually abusing two students is accused of fondling a
third.
Two, and fondling a third, and no mention of the Jewish leadership
transferring him to prevent his prosecution, and no mention of the
Jewish Church hiding him or sending him to "rehabilitation clinics" to
prevent his prosectution, and no mention of the Jewish leadership
otherwise interfering with the jobs of law enforcement. The story of
a Rabbi child predator is certainly a horrible story. A story of
DOZENS of Priest child predators that was implicitely supported and
protected by the church to the extent that they managed to accumulate
up to, and sometimes over a hundred victimes over a decades long
career is beyond horrible.
This is a difference that you will never recognize in your blindness.
In addition, it is interesting to note that we tend to hear about such
things, in particular the Catholic sex scandals, with regard to
religious sects that have a particular dislike for homosexuality.
I'll leave it to the reader to decide whether this is cause and effect
(e.g., the result of sexual repression that increased the chances of
inappropriate conduct as people try to conform to their religion's
tenants) or simply a case of the press feeding the public's desire to
ridicule people who preach one thing and practice another.
But (as you point out), at least the Jewish guy didn't have his
behavior covered up so that even more crimes could be committed.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Scruffy McScruffovitch" |
|
| Title: Re: Brooklyn Rabbi Faces New Child Molestation Charge |
13 Sep 2007 05:17:22 PM |
|
|
"No One" <noone@nospam.pacbell.net> wrote in message
news:87d4wmtdz7.fsf@nospam.pacbell.net...
"Scruffy McScruffovitch" <Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> writes:
"J Young" <younginsights@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1189699901.764865.8680@y42g2000hsy.googlegroups.com...
This is one that Yang may have missed.
http://wcbstv.com/topstories/local_story_256102103.html
Brooklyn Rabbi Faces New Child Molestation Charge
(CBS/AP) BROOKLYN A rabbi of an all-boys Orthodox school who has been
charged with sexually abusing two students is accused of fondling a
third.
Two, and fondling a third, and no mention of the Jewish leadership
transferring him to prevent his prosecution, and no mention of the
Jewish Church hiding him or sending him to "rehabilitation clinics" to
prevent his prosectution, and no mention of the Jewish leadership
otherwise interfering with the jobs of law enforcement. The story of
a Rabbi child predator is certainly a horrible story. A story of
DOZENS of Priest child predators that was implicitely supported and
protected by the church to the extent that they managed to accumulate
up to, and sometimes over a hundred victimes over a decades long
career is beyond horrible.
This is a difference that you will never recognize in your blindness.
In addition, it is interesting to note that we tend to hear about such
things, in particular the Catholic sex scandals, with regard to
religious sects that have a particular dislike for homosexuality.
I'll leave it to the reader to decide whether this is cause and effect
(e.g., the result of sexual repression that increased the chances of
inappropriate conduct as people try to conform to their religion's
tenants) or simply a case of the press feeding the public's desire to
ridicule people who preach one thing and practice another.
But (as you point out), at least the Jewish guy didn't have his
behavior covered up so that even more crimes could be committed.
It sure would have saved the Catholic Church a buttload of money had they
figured that out about 35 years ago.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "John D. Wentzky" |
|
| Title: Re: Brooklyn Rabbi Faces New Child Molestation Charge |
13 Sep 2007 05:34:15 PM |
|
|
"J Young" <younginsights@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1189699901.764865.8680@y42g2000hsy.googlegroups.com...
This is one that Yang may have missed.
What's different about this case and the other gayblade thievery ploys to
steal Church funds?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Scruffy McScruffovitch" |
|
| Title: Re: Brooklyn Rabbi Faces New Child Molestation Charge |
13 Sep 2007 05:50:17 PM |
|
|
"John D. Wentzky" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote in message
news:GViGi.42432$wN3.28243@bignews2.bellsouth.net...
"J Young" <younginsights@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1189699901.764865.8680@y42g2000hsy.googlegroups.com...
This is one that Yang may have missed.
What's different about this case and the other gayblade thievery ploys to
steal Church funds?
There has been no theftg, the Church has freely agreed to give the funds
away by acting as an accomplice to various criminals.
.
|
|
|
| User: "John D. Wentzky" |
|
| Title: Re: Brooklyn Rabbi Faces New Child Molestation Charge |
13 Sep 2007 07:16:16 PM |
|
|
"Scruffy McScruffovitch" <Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> wrote in message
news:13ejflg98c347bc@corp.supernews.com...
"John D. Wentzky" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote in message
news:GViGi.42432$wN3.28243@bignews2.bellsouth.net...
"J Young" <younginsights@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1189699901.764865.8680@y42g2000hsy.googlegroups.com...
This is one that Yang may have missed.
What's different about this case and the other gayblade thievery ploys to
steal Church funds?
There has been no theftg, the Church has freely agreed to give the funds
away by acting as an accomplice to various criminals.
Wrong, again.
The Church itself never made that agreement.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Scruffy McScruffovitch" |
|
| Title: Re: Brooklyn Rabbi Faces New Child Molestation Charge |
13 Sep 2007 07:23:26 PM |
|
|
"John D. Wentzky" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote in message
news:kpkGi.42519$wN3.27355@bignews2.bellsouth.net...
"Scruffy McScruffovitch" <Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> wrote in message
news:13ejflg98c347bc@corp.supernews.com...
"John D. Wentzky" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote in message
news:GViGi.42432$wN3.28243@bignews2.bellsouth.net...
"J Young" <younginsights@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1189699901.764865.8680@y42g2000hsy.googlegroups.com...
This is one that Yang may have missed.
What's different about this case and the other gayblade thievery ploys
to steal Church funds?
There has been no theftg, the Church has freely agreed to give the funds
away by acting as an accomplice to various criminals.
Wrong, again.
Nope, that's why they call them "settlements" In all the civil suits
involved, over two dozen now I believe, there have only been four
judgements, the rest the Church has agreed to a settlement.
The Church itself never made that agreement.
Yes, they have on a number of occasions. That's what happens when you
support and enable criminals.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: Brooklyn Rabbi Faces New Child Molestation Charge |
13 Sep 2007 08:56:57 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 13 Sep 2007 18:50:17 -0400, "Scruffy McScruffovitch"
<Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> wrote:
"John D. Wentzky" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote in message
news:GViGi.42432$wN3.28243@bignews2.bellsouth.net...
"J Young" <younginsights@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1189699901.764865.8680@y42g2000hsy.googlegroups.com...
This is one that Yang may have missed.
What's different about this case and the other gayblade thievery ploys to
steal Church funds?
There has been no theftg, the Church has freely agreed to give the funds
away by acting as an accomplice to various criminals.
But the boys stood there and allowed themselves to be raped, so that
they could demand Church money years later.
</Wentzky>
--
Al at Webdingers dot com
"They laughed at Newton, they laughed at Einstein, but they also laughed at
Bozo the Clown."
- Carl Sagan
.
|
|
|
| User: "Scruffy McScruffovitch" |
|
| Title: Re: Brooklyn Rabbi Faces New Child Molestation Charge |
13 Sep 2007 09:09:35 PM |
|
|
"Al Klein" <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote in message
news:jhqje3tra0afkh3pvcq629i0s3gop4gi3s@4ax.com...
On Thu, 13 Sep 2007 18:50:17 -0400, "Scruffy McScruffovitch"
<Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> wrote:
"John D. Wentzky" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote in message
news:GViGi.42432$wN3.28243@bignews2.bellsouth.net...
"J Young" <younginsights@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1189699901.764865.8680@y42g2000hsy.googlegroups.com...
This is one that Yang may have missed.
What's different about this case and the other gayblade thievery ploys
to
steal Church funds?
There has been no theftg, the Church has freely agreed to give the funds
away by acting as an accomplice to various criminals.
But the boys stood there and allowed themselves to be raped, so that
they could demand Church money years later.
</Wentzky>
As insane as that sounds, I have actually heard people try to use that
argument.
.
|
|
|
| User: "John D. Wentzky" |
|
| Title: Re: Brooklyn Rabbi Faces New Child Molestation Charge |
13 Sep 2007 09:17:38 PM |
|
|
"Scruffy McScruffovitch" <Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> wrote in message
news:13ejravoi40qe69@corp.supernews.com...
"Al Klein" <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote in message
news:jhqje3tra0afkh3pvcq629i0s3gop4gi3s@4ax.com...
On Thu, 13 Sep 2007 18:50:17 -0400, "Scruffy McScruffovitch"
<Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> wrote:
"John D. Wentzky" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote in message
news:GViGi.42432$wN3.28243@bignews2.bellsouth.net...
"J Young" <younginsights@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1189699901.764865.8680@y42g2000hsy.googlegroups.com...
This is one that Yang may have missed.
What's different about this case and the other gayblade thievery ploys
to
steal Church funds?
There has been no theftg, the Church has freely agreed to give the funds
away by acting as an accomplice to various criminals.
But the boys stood there and allowed themselves to be raped, so that
they could demand Church money years later.
</Wentzky>
As insane as that sounds, I have actually heard people try to use that
argument.
Only to the naive would such an argument against the homosexual agenda be
ignored.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Scruffy McScruffovitch" |
|
| Title: Re: Brooklyn Rabbi Faces New Child Molestation Charge |
13 Sep 2007 09:21:25 PM |
|
|
"John D. Wentzky" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote in message
news:K8mGi.59034$t9.57326@bignews7.bellsouth.net...
"Scruffy McScruffovitch" <Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> wrote in message
news:13ejravoi40qe69@corp.supernews.com...
"Al Klein" <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote in message
news:jhqje3tra0afkh3pvcq629i0s3gop4gi3s@4ax.com...
On Thu, 13 Sep 2007 18:50:17 -0400, "Scruffy McScruffovitch"
<Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> wrote:
"John D. Wentzky" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote in message
news:GViGi.42432$wN3.28243@bignews2.bellsouth.net...
"J Young" <younginsights@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1189699901.764865.8680@y42g2000hsy.googlegroups.com...
This is one that Yang may have missed.
What's different about this case and the other gayblade thievery ploys
to
steal Church funds?
There has been no theftg, the Church has freely agreed to give the funds
away by acting as an accomplice to various criminals.
But the boys stood there and allowed themselves to be raped, so that
they could demand Church money years later.
</Wentzky>
As insane as that sounds, I have actually heard people try to use that
argument.
Only to the naive
To anyone with a functioning cerebral cortex, which would exclude you.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: Brooklyn Rabbi Faces New Child Molestation Charge |
14 Sep 2007 09:35:48 AM |
|
|
On Thu, 13 Sep 2007 22:21:25 -0400, "Scruffy McScruffovitch"
<Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> wrote:
"John D. Wentzky" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote in message
news:K8mGi.59034$t9.57326@bignews7.bellsouth.net...
"Scruffy McScruffovitch" <Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> wrote in message
news:13ejravoi40qe69@corp.supernews.com...
"Al Klein" <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote in message
news:jhqje3tra0afkh3pvcq629i0s3gop4gi3s@4ax.com...
On Thu, 13 Sep 2007 18:50:17 -0400, "Scruffy McScruffovitch"
<Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> wrote:
"John D. Wentzky" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote in message
news:GViGi.42432$wN3.28243@bignews2.bellsouth.net...
"J Young" <younginsights@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1189699901.764865.8680@y42g2000hsy.googlegroups.com...
This is one that Yang may have missed.
What's different about this case and the other gayblade thievery ploys
to
steal Church funds?
There has been no theftg, the Church has freely agreed to give the funds
away by acting as an accomplice to various criminals.
But the boys stood there and allowed themselves to be raped, so that
they could demand Church money years later.
</Wentzky>
As insane as that sounds, I have actually heard people try to use that
argument.
Only to the naive
To anyone with a functioning cerebral cortex, which would exclude you.
Or even a functioning brain stem.
--
Al at Webdingers dot com
"They laughed at Newton, they laughed at Einstein, but they also laughed at
Bozo the Clown."
- Carl Sagan
.
|
|
|
| User: "Scruffy McScruffovitch" |
|
| Title: Re: Brooklyn Rabbi Faces New Child Molestation Charge |
14 Sep 2007 09:41:10 AM |
|
|
"Al Klein" <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote in message
news:j17le3h75rq977ci7hpvqcr5dphsu14a3r@4ax.com...
On Thu, 13 Sep 2007 22:21:25 -0400, "Scruffy McScruffovitch"
<Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> wrote:
"John D. Wentzky" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote in message
news:K8mGi.59034$t9.57326@bignews7.bellsouth.net...
"Scruffy McScruffovitch" <Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> wrote in message
news:13ejravoi40qe69@corp.supernews.com...
"Al Klein" <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote in message
news:jhqje3tra0afkh3pvcq629i0s3gop4gi3s@4ax.com...
On Thu, 13 Sep 2007 18:50:17 -0400, "Scruffy McScruffovitch"
<Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> wrote:
"John D. Wentzky" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote in message
news:GViGi.42432$wN3.28243@bignews2.bellsouth.net...
"J Young" <younginsights@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1189699901.764865.8680@y42g2000hsy.googlegroups.com...
This is one that Yang may have missed.
What's different about this case and the other gayblade thievery
ploys
to
steal Church funds?
There has been no theftg, the Church has freely agreed to give the
funds
away by acting as an accomplice to various criminals.
But the boys stood there and allowed themselves to be raped, so that
they could demand Church money years later.
</Wentzky>
As insane as that sounds, I have actually heard people try to use that
argument.
Only to the naive
To anyone with a functioning cerebral cortex, which would exclude you.
Or even a functioning brain stem.
LOL!
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Zeligg" |
|
| Title: Re: Brooklyn Rabbi Faces New Child Molestation Charge |
14 Sep 2007 10:14:11 AM |
|
|
On Thu, 13 Sep 2007 22:17:38 -0400, "John D. Wentzky"
<wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote:
"Scruffy McScruffovitch" <Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> wrote in message
news:13ejravoi40qe69@corp.supernews.com...
"Al Klein" <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote in message
news:jhqje3tra0afkh3pvcq629i0s3gop4gi3s@4ax.com...
On Thu, 13 Sep 2007 18:50:17 -0400, "Scruffy McScruffovitch"
<Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> wrote:
"John D. Wentzky" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote in message
news:GViGi.42432$wN3.28243@bignews2.bellsouth.net...
"J Young" <younginsights@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1189699901.764865.8680@y42g2000hsy.googlegroups.com...
This is one that Yang may have missed.
What's different about this case and the other gayblade thievery ploys
to
steal Church funds?
There has been no theftg, the Church has freely agreed to give the funds
away by acting as an accomplice to various criminals.
But the boys stood there and allowed themselves to be raped, so that
they could demand Church money years later.
</Wentzky>
As insane as that sounds, I have actually heard people try to use that
argument.
Only to the naive would such an argument against the homosexual agenda be
ignored.
All of the religious folks busted for child molestation have been
child molesters. Some may have been homosexual (although i don't know
that this has been proven in any of the cases). HOWEVER, all of them
have been players in their respective organized religions. Using your
logic, only to the naive would such an argument against the religious
agenda be ignored.
Zeligg
"You are megalomaniac, the worst kind, because you're a monstrous and
perverted idiot."
Oz' love letter to Zeligg
.
|
|
|
| User: "John D. Wentzky" |
|
| Title: Re: Brooklyn Rabbi Faces New Child Molestation Charge |
14 Sep 2007 12:49:59 PM |
|
|
"Zeligg" <zeligg@guessagain.com> wrote in message
news:m49le35rbq276e9kp1nfg4k22u15ku5duo@4ax.com...
On Thu, 13 Sep 2007 22:17:38 -0400, "John D. Wentzky"
<wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote:
"Scruffy McScruffovitch" <Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> wrote in message
news:13ejravoi40qe69@corp.supernews.com...
"Al Klein" <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote in message
news:jhqje3tra0afkh3pvcq629i0s3gop4gi3s@4ax.com...
On Thu, 13 Sep 2007 18:50:17 -0400, "Scruffy McScruffovitch"
<Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> wrote:
"John D. Wentzky" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote in message
news:GViGi.42432$wN3.28243@bignews2.bellsouth.net...
"J Young" <younginsights@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1189699901.764865.8680@y42g2000hsy.googlegroups.com...
This is one that Yang may have missed.
What's different about this case and the other gayblade thievery
ploys
to
steal Church funds?
There has been no theftg, the Church has freely agreed to give the
funds
away by acting as an accomplice to various criminals.
But the boys stood there and allowed themselves to be raped, so that
they could demand Church money years later.
</Wentzky>
As insane as that sounds, I have actually heard people try to use that
argument.
Only to the naive would such an argument against the homosexual agenda be
ignored.
All of the religious folks busted for child molestation have been
child molesters. Some may have been homosexual (although i don't know
that this has been proven in any of the cases). HOWEVER, all of them
have been players in their respective organized religions. Using your
logic, only to the naive would such an argument against the religious
agenda be ignored.
You are committing the fallacy of generalization.
The entire issue here is that the guilty and the innocent are separate
entities.
The issue I presented wasn't one of whether all homosexuals are guilty in
these matters; but, that there are those radical elements in many sects that
use methods unbecoming to the entire group it seems.
And, if it is only homosexuals in the Church committing consensual
homosexual acts with some members of the Church, the entire act is easily
labeled an anti-Church, homosexual thievery conspiracy.
Next we look at those who did commit these sexual acts with Church
leadership and we place the blame on the tempter who was taught to lure
unsuspecting persons into their web of deceit in their ***** whoring fool's
game that can easily be destroyed by the law itself.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Scruffy McScruffovitch" |
|
| Title: Re: Brooklyn Rabbi Faces New Child Molestation Charge |
14 Sep 2007 01:00:17 PM |
|
|
"John D. Wentzky" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote in message
news:bRzGi.85358$pu2.69743@bignews1.bellsouth.net...
"Zeligg" <zeligg@guessagain.com> wrote in message
news:m49le35rbq276e9kp1nfg4k22u15ku5duo@4ax.com...
On Thu, 13 Sep 2007 22:17:38 -0400, "John D. Wentzky"
<wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote:
"Scruffy McScruffovitch" <Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> wrote in message
news:13ejravoi40qe69@corp.supernews.com...
"Al Klein" <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote in message
news:jhqje3tra0afkh3pvcq629i0s3gop4gi3s@4ax.com...
On Thu, 13 Sep 2007 18:50:17 -0400, "Scruffy McScruffovitch"
<Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> wrote:
"John D. Wentzky" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote in message
news:GViGi.42432$wN3.28243@bignews2.bellsouth.net...
"J Young" <younginsights@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1189699901.764865.8680@y42g2000hsy.googlegroups.com...
This is one that Yang may have missed.
What's different about this case and the other gayblade thievery
ploys
to
steal Church funds?
There has been no theftg, the Church has freely agreed to give the
funds
away by acting as an accomplice to various criminals.
But the boys stood there and allowed themselves to be raped, so that
they could demand Church money years later.
</Wentzky>
As insane as that sounds, I have actually heard people try to use that
argument.
Only to the naive would such an argument against the homosexual agenda be
ignored.
All of the religious folks busted for child molestation have been
child molesters. Some may have been homosexual (although i don't know
that this has been proven in any of the cases). HOWEVER, all of them
have been players in their respective organized religions. Using your
logic, only to the naive would such an argument against the religious
agenda be ignored.
You are committing the fallacy of generalization.
The entire issue here is that the guilty and the innocent are separate
entities.
That is right. The pedophile priests are guilty of committing a crime,
namely molesting children and teens.
1. The church enabled those crimes.
2. The church acted, in many cases, as agents for the criminals, supplying
them with fresh children/teens even AFTER they were aware of the crimes.
3. The church protected them from prosecution, destroyed evidence, and
failed to turn them over the the appropriate law enforcement agency.
In any other context, in any other situation, this wold be enough to convict
on Accessory charges.
That is why the Church has had to shell out over $2 Billion Dollars to date,
with more suits in the wings. Stay tuned.
.
|
|
|
| User: "John D. Wentzky" |
|
| Title: Re: Brooklyn Rabbi Faces New Child Molestation Charge |
14 Sep 2007 09:21:36 PM |
|
|
"Scruffy McScruffovitch" <Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> wrote in message
news:13elj1jijhs8h1c@corp.supernews.com...
"John D. Wentzky" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote in message
news:bRzGi.85358$pu2.69743@bignews1.bellsouth.net...
"Zeligg" <zeligg@guessagain.com> wrote in message
news:m49le35rbq276e9kp1nfg4k22u15ku5duo@4ax.com...
On Thu, 13 Sep 2007 22:17:38 -0400, "John D. Wentzky"
<wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote:
"Scruffy McScruffovitch" <Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> wrote in message
news:13ejravoi40qe69@corp.supernews.com...
"Al Klein" <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote in message
news:jhqje3tra0afkh3pvcq629i0s3gop4gi3s@4ax.com...
On Thu, 13 Sep 2007 18:50:17 -0400, "Scruffy McScruffovitch"
<Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> wrote:
"John D. Wentzky" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote in message
news:GViGi.42432$wN3.28243@bignews2.bellsouth.net...
"J Young" <younginsights@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1189699901.764865.8680@y42g2000hsy.googlegroups.com...
This is one that Yang may have missed.
What's different about this case and the other gayblade thievery
ploys
to
steal Church funds?
There has been no theftg, the Church has freely agreed to give the
funds
away by acting as an accomplice to various criminals.
But the boys stood there and allowed themselves to be raped, so that
they could demand Church money years later.
</Wentzky>
As insane as that sounds, I have actually heard people try to use that
argument.
Only to the naive would such an argument against the homosexual agenda
be
ignored.
All of the religious folks busted for child molestation have been
child molesters. Some may have been homosexual (although i don't know
that this has been proven in any of the cases). HOWEVER, all of them
have been players in their respective organized religions. Using your
logic, only to the naive would such an argument against the religious
agenda be ignored.
You are committing the fallacy of generalization.
The entire issue here is that the guilty and the innocent are separate
entities.
That is right. The pedophile priests are guilty of committing a crime,
namely molesting children and teens.
Must be proven by the constitutional standards.
1. The church enabled those crimes.
*****, you anti-church fool.
2. The church acted, in many cases, as agents for the criminals,
supplying them with fresh children/teens even AFTER they were aware of the
crimes.
Wrong, again, and there is NO PROOF according to the constitutional
standard.
3. The church protected them from prosecution, destroyed evidence, and
failed to turn them over the the appropriate law enforcement agency.
I see no proof or evidence of that.
In any other context, in any other situation, this wold be enough to
convict on Accessory charges.
I see no proof of that.
That is why the Church has had to shell out over $2 Billion Dollars to
date, with more suits in the wings.
All those monies are subject to subrogation.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Scruffy McScruffovitch" |
|
| Title: Re: Brooklyn Rabbi Faces New Child Molestation Charge |
14 Sep 2007 09:31:44 PM |
|
|
"John D. Wentzky" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote in message
news:SkHGi.61907$U24.56349@bignews5.bellsouth.net...
"Scruffy McScruffovitch" <Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> wrote in message
news:13elj1jijhs8h1c@corp.supernews.com...
"John D. Wentzky" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote in message
news:bRzGi.85358$pu2.69743@bignews1.bellsouth.net...
"Zeligg" <zeligg@guessagain.com> wrote in message
news:m49le35rbq276e9kp1nfg4k22u15ku5duo@4ax.com...
On Thu, 13 Sep 2007 22:17:38 -0400, "John D. Wentzky"
<wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote:
"Scruffy McScruffovitch" <Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> wrote in message
news:13ejravoi40qe69@corp.supernews.com...
"Al Klein" <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote in message
news:jhqje3tra0afkh3pvcq629i0s3gop4gi3s@4ax.com...
On Thu, 13 Sep 2007 18:50:17 -0400, "Scruffy McScruffovitch"
<Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> wrote:
"John D. Wentzky" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote in message
news:GViGi.42432$wN3.28243@bignews2.bellsouth.net...
"J Young" <younginsights@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1189699901.764865.8680@y42g2000hsy.googlegroups.com...
This is one that Yang may have missed.
What's different about this case and the other gayblade thievery
ploys
to
steal Church funds?
There has been no theftg, the Church has freely agreed to give the
funds
away by acting as an accomplice to various criminals.
But the boys stood there and allowed themselves to be raped, so that
they could demand Church money years later.
</Wentzky>
As insane as that sounds, I have actually heard people try to use
that
argument.
Only to the naive would such an argument against the homosexual agenda
be
ignored.
All of the religious folks busted for child molestation have been
child molesters. Some may have been homosexual (although i don't know
that this has been proven in any of the cases). HOWEVER, all of them
have been players in their respective organized religions. Using your
logic, only to the naive would such an argument against the religious
agenda be ignored.
You are committing the fallacy of generalization.
The entire issue here is that the guilty and the innocent are separate
entities.
That is right. The pedophile priests are guilty of committing a crime,
namely molesting children and teens.
Must be proven by the constitutional standards.
As is has been, in numerous civil trials.
1. The church enabled those crimes.
*****, you anti-church fool.
No, I am quite accurate. This has been proven in a court of law.
2. The church acted, in many cases, as agents for the criminals,
supplying them with fresh children/teens even AFTER they were aware of
the crimes.
Wrong, again,
Nope, I am 100% correct.
3. The church protected them from prosecution, destroyed evidence, and
failed to turn them over the the appropriate law enforcement agency.
I see no proof or evidence of that.
Then you need to pick up a newspaper once in a while, or as I have, read the
transcript for the trial for the Boston Diocese, as well as the almost dozen
others.
In any other context, in any other situation, this wold be enough to
convict on Accessory charges.
I see no proof of that.
Then you're a fool. It has been proven well in several civil trials.
That is why the Church has had to shell out over $2 Billion Dollars to
date, with more suits in the wings.
All those monies are subject to subrogation.
No, they are not.
.
|
|
|
| User: "John D. Wentzky" |
|
| Title: Re: Brooklyn Rabbi Faces New Child Molestation Charge |
14 Sep 2007 09:38:16 PM |
|
|
"Scruffy McScruffovitch" <Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> wrote in message
news:13emh0hfe4afe5e@corp.supernews.com...
"John D. Wentzky" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote in message
news:SkHGi.61907$U24.56349@bignews5.bellsouth.net...
"Scruffy McScruffovitch" <Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> wrote in message
news:13elj1jijhs8h1c@corp.supernews.com...
"John D. Wentzky" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote in message
news:bRzGi.85358$pu2.69743@bignews1.bellsouth.net...
"Zeligg" <zeligg@guessagain.com> wrote in message
news:m49le35rbq276e9kp1nfg4k22u15ku5duo@4ax.com...
On Thu, 13 Sep 2007 22:17:38 -0400, "John D. Wentzky"
<wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote:
"Scruffy McScruffovitch" <Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> wrote in message
news:13ejravoi40qe69@corp.supernews.com...
"Al Klein" <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote in message
news:jhqje3tra0afkh3pvcq629i0s3gop4gi3s@4ax.com...
On Thu, 13 Sep 2007 18:50:17 -0400, "Scruffy McScruffovitch"
<Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> wrote:
"John D. Wentzky" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote in message
news:GViGi.42432$wN3.28243@bignews2.bellsouth.net...
"J Young" <younginsights@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1189699901.764865.8680@y42g2000hsy.googlegroups.com...
This is one that Yang may have missed.
What's different about this case and the other gayblade thievery
ploys
to
steal Church funds?
There has been no theftg, the Church has freely agreed to give the
funds
away by acting as an accomplice to various criminals.
But the boys stood there and allowed themselves to be raped, so
that
they could demand Church money years later.
</Wentzky>
As insane as that sounds, I have actually heard people try to use
that
argument.
Only to the naive would such an argument against the homosexual agenda
be
ignored.
All of the religious folks busted for child molestation have been
child molesters. Some may have been homosexual (although i don't know
that this has been proven in any of the cases). HOWEVER, all of them
have been players in their respective organized religions. Using your
logic, only to the naive would such an argument against the religious
agenda be ignored.
You are committing the fallacy of generalization.
The entire issue here is that the guilty and the innocent are separate
entities.
That is right. The pedophile priests are guilty of committing a crime,
namely molesting children and teens.
Must be proven by the constitutional standards.
As is has been, in numerous civil trials.
*****.
1. The church enabled those crimes.
*****, you anti-church fool.
No, I am quite accurate. This has been proven in a court of law.
Impossible.
2. The church acted, in many cases, as agents for the criminals,
supplying them with fresh children/teens even AFTER they were aware of
the crimes.
Wrong, again,
Nope, I am 100% correct.
Impossible.
The Church never authorized such crimes.
3. The church protected them from prosecution, destroyed evidence, and
failed to turn them over the the appropriate law enforcement agency.
I see no proof or evidence of that.
Then you need to pick up a newspaper once in a while, or as I have, read
the transcript for the trial for the Boston Diocese, as well as the almost
dozen others.
So I can see the errors of anti-Church opinionated anti-constitution
assholes in it?
In any other context, in any other situation, this wold be enough to
convict on Accessory charges.
I see no proof of that.
Then you're a fool. It has been proven well in several civil trials.
Impossible.
That is why the Church has had to shell out over $2 Billion Dollars to
date, with more suits in the wings.
All those monies are subject to subrogation.
No, they are not.
Wrong, again, idiot.
Defective jury awards are recoverable by appeal.
Injunctions shoulda been filed to protect the interests of the Church from
you frauds.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Scruffy McScruffovitch" |
|
| Title: Re: Brooklyn Rabbi Faces New Child Molestation Charge |
14 Sep 2007 09:58:59 PM |
|
|
"John D. Wentzky" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote in message
news:yAHGi.61922$U24.36357@bignews5.bellsouth.net...
"Scruffy McScruffovitch" <Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> wrote in message
news:13emh0hfe4afe5e@corp.supernews.com...
"John D. Wentzky" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote in message
news:SkHGi.61907$U24.56349@bignews5.bellsouth.net...
"Scruffy McScruffovitch" <Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> wrote in message
news:13elj1jijhs8h1c@corp.supernews.com...
"John D. Wentzky" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote in message
news:bRzGi.85358$pu2.69743@bignews1.bellsouth.net...
"Zeligg" <zeligg@guessagain.com> wrote in message
news:m49le35rbq276e9kp1nfg4k22u15ku5duo@4ax.com...
On Thu, 13 Sep 2007 22:17:38 -0400, "John D. Wentzky"
<wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote:
"Scruffy McScruffovitch" <Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> wrote in message
news:13ejravoi40qe69@corp.supernews.com...
"Al Klein" <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote in message
news:jhqje3tra0afkh3pvcq629i0s3gop4gi3s@4ax.com...
On Thu, 13 Sep 2007 18:50:17 -0400, "Scruffy McScruffovitch"
<Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> wrote:
"John D. Wentzky" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote in message
news:GViGi.42432$wN3.28243@bignews2.bellsouth.net...
"J Young" <younginsights@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1189699901.764865.8680@y42g2000hsy.googlegroups.com...
This is one that Yang may have missed.
What's different about this case and the other gayblade thievery
ploys
to
steal Church funds?
There has been no theftg, the Church has freely agreed to give the
funds
away by acting as an accomplice to various criminals.
But the boys stood there and allowed themselves to be raped, so
that
they could demand Church money years later.
</Wentzky>
As insane as that sounds, I have actually heard people try to use
that
argument.
Only to the naive would such an argument against the homosexual
agenda be
ignored.
All of the religious folks busted for child molestation have been
child molesters. Some may have been homosexual (although i don't
know
that this has been proven in any of the cases). HOWEVER, all of them
have been players in their respective organized religions. Using
your
logic, only to the naive would such an argument against the religious
agenda be ignored.
You are committing the fallacy of generalization.
The entire issue here is that the guilty and the innocent are separate
entities.
That is right. The pedophile priests are guilty of committing a crime,
namely molesting children and teens.
Must be proven by the constitutional standards.
As is has been, in numerous civil trials.
*****.
Nope, I am 100% correct.
1. The church enabled those crimes.
*****, you anti-church fool.
No, I am quite accurate. This has been proven in a court of law.
Impossible.
Not only possible, but it has already been done.
2. The church acted, in many cases, as agents for the criminals,
supplying them with fresh children/teens even AFTER they were aware of
the crimes.
Wrong, again,
Nope, I am 100% correct.
Impossible.
Nope, it is both possible, and has already happened.
The Church never authorized such crimes.
The church has acted to enable the crimes, and protect the criminal.
Explicit authorization is not a requirement to be an accessory to a crime.
Priests are considered agents of the Church, their actions are the
responsibility of the Church.
3. The church protected them from prosecution, destroyed evidence, and
failed to turn them over the the appropriate law enforcement agency.
I see no proof or evidence of that.
Then you need to pick up a newspaper once in a while, or as I have, read
the transcript for the trial for the Boston Diocese, as well as the
almost dozen others.
So I can see the errors of anti-Church opinionated anti-constitution
assholes in it?
Whatever helps you sleep at night, but the fact remains that the Church, or
rather several diocese of the church, have been found guilty in a court of
law, by a jury of their peers, which has resulted in very heavy fines.
In any other context, in any other situation, this wold be enough to
convict on Accessory charges.
I see no proof of that.
Then you're a fool. It has been proven well in several civil trials.
Impossible.
Not only possible, but it has already happened.
That is why the Church has had to shell out over $2 Billion Dollars to
date, with more suits in the wings.
All those monies are subject to subrogation.
No, they are not.
Wrong, again, idiot.
No, I am 100% accurate.
Defective jury awards are recoverable by appeal.
In all but four cases, the Diocese in question has agreed to the settlement
involved. These were settlements, not judgements, there will be no appeal.
Of the remaining four, two have already exhausted all appeals, and the last
two have never filed an appeal.
Injunctions shoulda been filed to protect the interests of the Church from
you frauds.
There has been no fraud, so I consider your last statement to be irrelevant.
.
|
|
|
| User: "John D. Wentzky" |
|
| Title: Re: Brooklyn Rabbi Faces New Child Molestation Charge |
15 Sep 2007 01:29:42 PM |
|
|
"Scruffy McScruffovitch" <Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> wrote in message
news:13emijoklkpei3d@corp.supernews.com...
"John D. Wentzky" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote in message
news:yAHGi.61922$U24.36357@bignews5.bellsouth.net...
Defective jury awards are recoverable by appeal.
In all but four cases, the Diocese in question has agreed to the
settlement involved. These were settlements, not judgements, there will
be no appeal. Of the remaining four, two have already exhausted all
appeals, and the last two have never filed an appeal.
Thanks for the information, but can I say thanks for the memories?
Injunctions shoulda been filed to protect the interests of the Church
from you frauds.
There has been no fraud, so I consider your last statement to be
irrelevant.
No fraud?
Initially there was a story that said 500 cases.
What a joke.
The odds that there were exactly 500 cases is so astronimical against that
initial claim being true, which claim they changed to 508 to try to keep
their ***** ballon afloat, there is no way that fraud could not have been
involved.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Scruffy McScruffovitch" |
|
| Title: Re: Brooklyn Rabbi Faces New Child Molestation Charge |
15 Sep 2007 04:25:24 PM |
|
|
"John D. Wentzky" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote in message
news:2uVGi.60404$t9.7307@bignews7.bellsouth.net...
"Scruffy McScruffovitch" <Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> wrote in message
news:13emijoklkpei3d@corp.supernews.com...
"John D. Wentzky" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote in message
news:yAHGi.61922$U24.36357@bignews5.bellsouth.net...
Defective jury awards are recoverable by appeal.
In all but four cases, the Diocese in question has agreed to the
settlement involved. These were settlements, not judgements, there will
be no appeal. Of the remaining four, two have already exhausted all
appeals, and the last two have never filed an appeal.
Thanks for the information, but can I say thanks for the memories?
Injunctions shoulda been filed to protect the interests of the Church
from you frauds.
There has been no fraud, so I consider your last statement to be
irrelevant.
No fraud?
Initially there was a story that said 500 cases.
What a joke.
The odds that there were exactly 500 cases is so astronimical against that
initial claim being true, which claim they changed to 508 to try to keep
their ***** ballon afloat, there is no way that fraud could not have
been involved.
Are you really this stupid? Have you ever heard of a "Class Action
Lawsuit"? It's where they took all 500 or so cases, and combined them into
on class action suit. Two priests in the Boston Diocese had over 100
different plaintifs each.
.
|
|
|
| User: "John D. Wentzky" |
|
| Title: Re: Brooklyn Rabbi Faces New Child Molestation Charge |
15 Sep 2007 09:32:47 PM |
|
|
"Scruffy McScruffovitch" <Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> wrote in message
news:13eoje634ivn974@corp.supernews.com...
"John D. Wentzky" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote in message
news:2uVGi.60404$t9.7307@bignews7.bellsouth.net...
"Scruffy McScruffovitch" <Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> wrote in message
news:13emijoklkpei3d@corp.supernews.com...
"John D. Wentzky" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote in message
news:yAHGi.61922$U24.36357@bignews5.bellsouth.net...
Defective jury awards are recoverable by appeal.
In all but four cases, the Diocese in question has agreed to the
settlement involved. These were settlements, not judgements, there will
be no appeal. Of the remaining four, two have already exhausted all
appeals, and the last two have never filed an appeal.
Thanks for the information, but can I say thanks for the memories?
Injunctions shoulda been filed to protect the interests of the Church
from you frauds.
There has been no fraud, so I consider your last statement to be
irrelevant.
No fraud?
Initially there was a story that said 500 cases.
What a joke.
The odds that there were exactly 500 cases is so astronimical against
that initial claim being true, which claim they changed to 508 to try to
keep their ***** ballon afloat, there is no way that fraud could not
have been involved.
Are you really this stupid? Have you ever heard of a "Class Action
Lawsuit"? It's where they took all 500 or so cases, and combined them
into on class action suit. Two priests in the Boston Diocese had over 100
different plaintifs each.
Sure did.
But, why wasn't the Church represented as a class then?
You act as if all persons in those Churches were guilty of those crimes.
And, how many of those priests contributed any of those funds that were used
to pay the plaintiffs?
.
|
|
|
| User: "The Chief Instigator" |
|
| Title: Re: Brooklyn Rabbi Faces New Child Molestation Charge |
16 Sep 2007 02:19:18 AM |
|
|
"John D. Wentzky" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"Scruffy McScruffovitch" <Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> wrote in message
news:13eoje634ivn974@corp.supernews.com...
"John D. Wentzky" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote in message
news:2uVGi.60404$t9.7307@bignews7.bellsouth.net...
"Scruffy McScruffovitch" <Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> wrote in message
news:13emijoklkpei3d@corp.supernews.com...
"John D. Wentzky" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote in message
news:yAHGi.61922$U24.36357@bignews5.bellsouth.net...
Defective jury awards are recoverable by appeal.
In all but four cases, the Diocese in question has agreed to the
settlement involved. These were settlements, not judgements, there will
be no appeal. Of the remaining four, two have already exhausted all
appeals, and the last two have never filed an appeal.
Thanks for the information, but can I say thanks for the memories?
Injunctions shoulda been filed to protect the interests of the Church
from you frauds.
There has been no fraud, so I consider your last statement to be
irrelevant.
No fraud? Initially there was a story that said 500 cases. What a joke.
The odds that there were exactly 500 cases is so astronimical against that
initial claim being true, which claim they changed to 508 to try to keep
their ***** ballon afloat, there is no way that fraud could not have
been involved.
Are you really this stupid? Have you ever heard of a "Class Action
Lawsuit"? It's where they took all 500 or so cases, and combined them
into on class action suit. Two priests in the Boston Diocese had over 100
different plaintifs each.
Sure did.
But, why wasn't the Church represented as a class then?
You act as if all persons in those Churches were guilty of those crimes.
Not all were - but the RCC was aiding and abetting those crimes, by moving
priests accused of pederasty to parishes or dioceses where they were less
likely to be prosecuted.
And, how many of those priests contributed any of those funds that were used
to pay the plaintiffs?
The Church gets to pay that off, for the reasons I stated. Two millennia of
hypocrisy is going to get quite a few kicks to the crotch in the next year or
two...and it's way past about time that *that* sleazy practice is put paid.
(That's a British usage that you'll never understand, and it doesn't mean
anything that you think it does.)
--
Patrick "The Chief Instigator" Humphrey (patrick@io.com) Houston, Texas
chiefinstigator.us.tt/aeros.php (TCI's 2006-07 Houston Aeros) AA#2273
LAST GAME: San Antonio 4, Houston 2 (April 15)
NEXT GAME: Saturday, October 6 vs. Chicago, 7:35
.
|
|
|
| User: "John D. Wentzky" |
|
| Title: Re: Brooklyn Rabbi Faces New Child Molestation Charge |
16 Sep 2007 06:41:24 PM |
|
|
"The Chief Instigator" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szkwsuryt55.fsf@eris.io.com...
"John D. Wentzky" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"Scruffy McScruffovitch" <Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> wrote in message
news:13eoje634ivn974@corp.supernews.com...
"John D. Wentzky" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote in message
news:2uVGi.60404$t9.7307@bignews7.bellsouth.net...
"Scruffy McScruffovitch" <Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> wrote in message
news:13emijoklkpei3d@corp.supernews.com...
"John D. Wentzky" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote in message
news:yAHGi.61922$U24.36357@bignews5.bellsouth.net...
Defective jury awards are recoverable by appeal.
In all but four cases, the Diocese in question has agreed to the
settlement involved. These were settlements, not judgements, there
will
be no appeal. Of the remaining four, two have already exhausted all
appeals, and the last two have never filed an appeal.
Thanks for the information, but can I say thanks for the memories?
Injunctions shoulda been filed to protect the interests of the Church
from you frauds.
There has been no fraud, so I consider your last statement to be
irrelevant.
No fraud? Initially there was a story that said 500 cases. What a
joke.
The odds that there were exactly 500 cases is so astronimical against
that
initial claim being true, which claim they changed to 508 to try to
keep
their ***** ballon afloat, there is no way that fraud could not have
been involved.
Are you really this stupid? Have you ever heard of a "Class Action
Lawsuit"? It's where they took all 500 or so cases, and combined them
into on class action suit. Two priests in the Boston Diocese had over
100
different plaintifs each.
Sure did.
But, why wasn't the Church represented as a class then?
You act as if all persons in those Churches were guilty of those crimes.
Not all were - but the RCC was aiding and abetting those crimes,
Who, specifically, did that?
You think a buklding was capable of doing that?
by moving
priests accused of pederasty to parishes or dioceses where they were less
likely to be prosecuted.
Organizations are not entities where a minority element is considered to be
the whole.
Projecting guilt upon the whole is quite negligent if there are any innocent
in the Church.
And, how many of those priests contributed any of those funds that were
used
to pay the plaintiffs?
The Church gets to pay that off, for the reasons I stated.
Statutes do not show me that any of those reasons are sufficient to make
such payments.
Two millennia of hypocrisy is going to get quite a few kicks to the crotch
in the next year or
two...
Two millennia of attacking the Church is what is going to get a huge sword
against it in due time.
Or, should I say 44 years of such clandestine deepthroat anti-Christian
activities is what will get slain?
LOL!
Just when you think you found a way to defeat Christianity, it comes right
back to rid the people of the treason against it.
and it's way past about time that *that* sleazy practice is put paid.
What sleazy practice?
Methinks you fail to recognize who the sleazebags are.
(That's a British usage that you'll never understand, and it doesn't mean
anything that you think it does.)
You think Prince Charles is going to be coronated and then the law from the
King James version of the Bible will be instituted?
.
|
|
|
| User: "The Chief Instigator" |
|
| Title: Re: Brooklyn Rabbi Faces New Child Molestation Charge |
17 Sep 2007 12:36:53 AM |
|
|
"John D. Wentzky" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"The Chief Instigator" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szkwsuryt55.fsf@eris.io.com...
"John D. Wentzky" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"Scruffy McScruffovitch" <Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> wrote in message
news:13eoje634ivn974@corp.supernews.com...
"John D. Wentzky" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote in message
news:2uVGi.60404$t9.7307@bignews7.bellsouth.net...
"Scruffy McScruffovitch" <Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> wrote in message
news:13emijoklkpei3d@corp.supernews.com...
"John D. Wentzky" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote in message
news:yAHGi.61922$U24.36357@bignews5.bellsouth.net...
Defective jury awards are recoverable by appeal.
In all but four cases, the Diocese in question has agreed to the
settlement involved. These were settlements, not judgements, there
will be no appeal. Of the remaining four, two have already exhausted
all appeals, and the last two have never filed an appeal.
Thanks for the information, but can I say thanks for the memories?
Injunctions shoulda been filed to protect the interests of the Church
from you frauds.
There has been no fraud, so I consider your last statement to be
irrelevant.
No fraud? Initially there was a story that said 500 cases. What a
joke. The odds that there were exactly 500 cases is so astronimical
against that initial claim being true, which claim they changed to 508
to try to keep their ***** ballon afloat, there is no way that fraud
could not have been involved.
Are you really this stupid? Have you ever heard of a "Class Action
Lawsuit"? It's where they took all 500 or so cases, and combined them
into on class action suit. Two priests in the Boston Diocese had over
100 different plaintifs each.
Sure did. But, why wasn't the Church represented as a class then? You act
as if all persons in those Churches were guilty of those crimes.
Not all were - but the RCC was aiding and abetting those crimes,
Who, specifically, did that?
The higher orders of the clergy that were aiding and abetting by making sure
the priests being accused were moved to parishes that couldn't prosecute them
as easily.
You think a buklding was capable of doing that?
Do you think at all? (Not by that statement, you don't.)
by moving priests accused of pederasty to parishes or dioceses where they
were less likely to be prosecuted.
Organizations are not entities where a minority element is considered to be
the whole. Projecting guilt upon the whole is quite negligent if there are
any innocent in the Church.
***** all you want - the RCC is going to pay dearly for its actions, sooner or
later.
And, how many of those priests contributed any of those funds that were
used to pay the plaintiffs?
The Church gets to pay that off, for the reasons I stated.
Statutes do not show me that any of those reasons are sufficient to make
such payments.
....and your opinions are worthless, since you're delusional and don't
understand much of what you read.
Two millennia of hypocrisy is going to get quite a few kicks to the crotch
in the next year or two...
Two millennia of attacking the Church is what is going to get a huge sword
against it in due time. Or, should I say 44 years of such clandestine
deepthroat anti-Christian activities is what will get slain?
Clandestine, hell...it's time for the ***** of Rome's dirty laundry to be
sterilized by the light.
LOL!
Just when you think you found a way to defeat Christianity, it comes right
back to rid the people of the treason against it.
You drooling moron...the RCC is not a government, outside of the Vatican.
and it's way past about time that *that* sleazy practice is put paid.
What sleazy practice?
Two millennia of molesting altar boys, while preaching about the supposed
evils of homosexuality - for a start.
Methinks you fail to recognize who the sleazebags are.
At least you aren't one, but only because you're insane.
(That's a British usage that you'll never understand, and it doesn't mean
anything that you think it does.)
You think Prince Charles is going to be coronated and then the law from the
King James version of the Bible will be instituted?
I think you've damaged your mind beyond any hope of repair.
--
Patrick "The Chief Instigator" Humphrey (patrick@io.com) Houston, Texas
chiefinstigator.us.tt/aeros.php (TCI's 2006-07 Houston Aeros) AA#2273
LAST GAME: San Antonio 4, Houston 2 (April 15)
NEXT GAME: Saturday, October 6 vs. Chicago, 7:35
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Scruffy McScruffovitch" |
|
| Title: Re: Brooklyn Rabbi Faces New Child Molestation Charge |
15 Sep 2007 09:48:00 PM |
|
|
"John D. Wentzky" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote in message
news:lB0Hi.94063$pu2.36402@bignews1.bellsouth.net...
"Scruffy McScruffovitch" <Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> wrote in message
news:13eoje634ivn974@corp.supernews.com...
"John D. Wentzky" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote in message
news:2uVGi.60404$t9.7307@bignews7.bellsouth.net...
"Scruffy McScruffovitch" <Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> wrote in message
news:13emijoklkpei3d@corp.supernews.com...
"John D. Wentzky" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote in message
news:yAHGi.61922$U24.36357@bignews5.bellsouth.net...
Defective jury awards are recoverable by appeal.
In all but four cases, the Diocese in question has agreed to the
settlement involved. These were settlements, not judgements, there
will be no appeal. Of the remaining four, two have already exhausted
all appeals, and the last two have never filed an appeal.
Thanks for the information, but can I say thanks for the memories?
Injunctions shoulda been filed to protect the interests of the Church
from you frauds.
There has been no fraud, so I consider your last statement to be
irrelevant.
No fraud?
Initially there was a story that said 500 cases.
What a joke.
The odds that there were exactly 500 cases is so astronimical against
that initial claim being true, which claim they changed to 508 to try to
keep their ***** ballon afloat, there is no way that fraud could not
have been involved.
Are you really this stupid? Have you ever heard of a "Class Action
Lawsuit"? It's where they took all 500 or so cases, and combined them
into on class action suit. Two priests in the Boston Diocese had over
100 different plaintifs each.
Sure did.
But, why wasn't the Church represented as a class then?
Because it was the only defendant. In order to be considered a "class" more
than one "church" would have had to have been charged. To be more accurate,
however, it wasn't the church that was charged, but the individual diocese
in each case. However, recently there have been cases of the Vatican
sheltering these monsters.
http://news.scotsman.com/topics.cfm?tid=305&id=1072822004
You act as if all persons in those Churches were guilty of those crimes.
Not relevant. The priests were agents of the church, the church acted to
enable the crimes and to supply the priests with victims.
And, how many of those priests contributed any of those funds that were
used to pay the plaintiffs?
Also, irrelevant. The church was not charged with pedophilia, it was
charged with aiding and abetting and accessory.
.
|
|
|
| User: "John D. Wentzky" |
|
| Title: Re: Brooklyn Rabbi Faces New Child Molestation Charge |
15 Sep 2007 10:04:21 PM |
|
|
"Scruffy McScruffovitch" <Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> wrote in message
news:13ep6b21c50fs1d@corp.supernews.com...
"John D. Wentzky" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote in message
news:lB0Hi.94063$pu2.36402@bignews1.bellsouth.net...
"Scruffy McScruffovitch" <Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> wrote in message
news:13eoje634ivn974@corp.supernews.com...
"John D. Wentzky" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote in message
news:2uVGi.60404$t9.7307@bignews7.bellsouth.net...
"Scruffy McScruffovitch" <Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> wrote in message
news:13emijoklkpei3d@corp.supernews.com...
"John D. Wentzky" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote in message
news:yAHGi.61922$U24.36357@bignews5.bellsouth.net...
Defective jury awards are recoverable by appeal.
In all but four cases, the Diocese in question has agreed to the
settlement involved. These were settlements, not judgements, there
will be no appeal. Of the remaining four, two have already exhausted
all appeals, and the last two have never filed an appeal.
Thanks for the information, but can I say thanks for the memories?
Injunctions shoulda been filed to protect the interests of the Church
from you frauds.
There has been no fraud, so I consider your last statement to be
irrelevant.
No fraud?
Initially there was a story that said 500 cases.
What a joke.
The odds that there were exactly 500 cases is so astronimical against
that initial claim being true, which claim they changed to 508 to try
to keep their ***** ballon afloat, there is no way that fraud could
not have been involved.
Are you really this stupid? Have you ever heard of a "Class Action
Lawsuit"? It's where they took all 500 or so cases, and combined them
into on class action suit. Two priests in the Boston Diocese had over
100 different plaintifs each.
Sure did.
But, why wasn't the Church represented as a class then?
Because it was the only defendant.
Propaganda.
In order to be considered a "class" more than one "church" would have had
to have been charged.
Persons, baby, persons is what the Constitution is designed to protect.
Members are persons.
To be more accurate, however, it wasn't the church that was charged, but
the individual diocese in each case.
Irrelevant to the Constitution.
However, recently there have been cases of the Vatican sheltering these
monsters.
In Italy?
Wow, No case in the USA?
Remember the song, "Can't touch this."?
http://news.scotsman.com/topics.cfm?tid=305&id=1072822004
You act as if all persons in those Churches were guilty of those crimes.
Not relevant.
False denial.
The priests were agents of the church,
Wow. Now you think they were agents and not priests.
the church acted to enable the crimes and to supply the priests with
victims.
Where is the proof of that and how does that do anything to attribute guilt
to any church member or employee?
It doesn't.
Subrogation is inevitable.
And, how many of those priests contributed any of those funds that were
used to pay the plaintiffs?
Also, irrelevant.
Wrong.
The church was not charged with pedophilia,
Wow. Now you have absolved it of any guilt.
it was charged with aiding and abetting and accessory.
How so?
Got proof?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Scruffy McScruffovitch" |
|
| Title: Re: Brooklyn Rabbi Faces New Child Molestation Charge |
15 Sep 2007 10:18:29 PM |
|
|
"John D. Wentzky" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote in message
news:W21Hi.94137$pu2.5405@bignews1.bellsouth.net...
"Scruffy McScruffovitch" <Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> wrote in message
news:13ep6b21c50fs1d@corp.supernews.com...
"John D. Wentzky" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote in message
news:lB0Hi.94063$pu2.36402@bignews1.bellsouth.net...
"Scruffy McScruffovitch" <Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> wrote in message
news:13eoje634ivn974@corp.supernews.com...
"John D. Wentzky" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote in message
news:2uVGi.60404$t9.7307@bignews7.bellsouth.net...
"Scruffy McScruffovitch" <Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> wrote in message
news:13emijoklkpei3d@corp.supernews.com...
"John D. Wentzky" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote in message
news:yAHGi.61922$U24.36357@bignews5.bellsouth.net...
Defective jury awards are recoverable by appeal.
In all but four cases, the Diocese in question has agreed to the
settlement involved. These were settlements, not judgements, there
will be no appeal. Of the remaining four, two have already exhausted
all appeals, and the last two have never filed an appeal.
Thanks for the information, but can I say thanks for the memories?
Injunctions shoulda been filed to protect the interests of the
Church from you frauds.
There has been no fraud, so I consider your last statement to be
irrelevant.
No fraud?
Initially there was a story that said 500 cases.
What a joke.
The odds that there were exactly 500 cases is so astronimical against
that initial claim being true, which claim they changed to 508 to try
to keep their ***** ballon afloat, there is no way that fraud could
not have been involved.
Are you really this stupid? Have you ever heard of a "Class Action
Lawsuit"? It's where they took all 500 or so cases, and combined them
into on class action suit. Two priests in the Boston Diocese had over
100 different plaintifs each.
Sure did.
But, why wasn't the Church represented as a class then?
Because it was the only defendant.
Propaganda.
No, actual fact.
In order to be considered a "class" more than one "church" would have
had to have been charged.
Persons, baby, persons is what the Constitution is designed to protect.
Members are persons.
The members weren't sued, the Diocese was sued.
To be more accurate, however, it wasn't the church that was charged, but
the individual diocese in each case.
Irrelevant to the Constitution.
But quite relevant to the lawsuits.
However, recently there have been cases of the Vatican sheltering these
monsters.
In Italy?
Yep.
Wow, No case in the USA?
Several, as the over $2 Billion in settlements and judgements do attest.
Remember the song, "Can't touch this."?
Ever hear the song, "Money..." by Pink Floyd?
http://news.scotsman.com/topics.cfm?tid=305&id=1072822004
You act as if all persons in those Churches were guilty of those crimes.
The priests act as agents of the church. If the church does nothing to stop
them when they are aware of their activities, then it is implicit support of
said activities.
Not relevant.
False denial.
Nope, it's simply not relevant.
The priests were agents of the church,
Wow. Now you think they were agents and not priests.
Go and look up what the term "agent" means in a good law dictionary.
the church acted to enable the crimes and to supply the priests with
victims.
Where is the proof of that and how does that do anything to attribute
guilt to any church member or employee?
It is all in the court transcripts of the several suits. I would suggest
that you read them. The Boston Diocese, for example, kept very detailed
records of the activities of many of these priests, that was subpoenaed and
presented as evidence against them.
It doesn't.
Subrogation is inevitable.
Subrogation will never occur in these cases.
And, how many of those priests contributed any of those funds that were
used to pay the plaintiffs?
Also, irrelevant.
Wrong.
Nope, 100% correct.
The church was not charged with pedophilia,
Wow. Now you have absolved it of any guilt.
it was charged with aiding and abetting and accessory.
How so?
Got proof?
Yep, all $2 billion dollars worth of proof. LOL! Try reading the court
transcripts, they are quite enlightening.
.
|
|
|
| User: "John D. Wentzky" |
|
| Title: Re: Brooklyn Rabbi Faces New Child Molestation Charge |
16 Sep 2007 06:35:20 PM |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
