Haiti and the missionaries

[randy]

Call me cold and heartless--recall ALL AMERICAN HELP until the missonaries are freed. Ungrateful bastards!!

[SallyLightfoot]

I understand your point, but I think the issue is more complicated. US relief efforts, commendable as they are, do not automatically grant a religious group the right to take children from Haiti without official documentation and legal process. They may have had good intentions, but these baptist (christian evangelical) missionaries attempted to traffick children for religious purposes. <blockquote>[Group Leader Laura Silsby] said they had documents from the Dominican government, but did not seek any paperwork from the Haitian authorities before taking the children to the border.</blockquote><blockquote>Of the 33 children the team was seeking to aid, Silsby said, "They really didn't have any paperwork. This is, again, probably a misunderstanding on my part, but I did not really understand that that would really need to be required."</blockquote><blockquote>Carlos Castillo, the Dominican Republic's consul general in Port-au-Prince, gave a different account: In an interview he said he met with Ms. Silsby on Friday and told her she lacked any documents to transport children, and warned her not to try or she could be arrested.</blockquote>This abduction is not just an isolated case. There have been a couple of baptist missionary groups detained for this. The <a href="http://www.landoverbaptist.org/2010/february/helotryhaiti.html" target="_new">most recent incident</a> had this tidbit to report:<blockquote>When police officers asked them for documents, group members held up their Bibles and said, "We're working for Jesus! And the Son of the Living God does not require any documentation!"</blockquote>I hear your point, but the missionaries appear to be in the wrong here.

<a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703357104575045794048725562.html?mod=WSJ_article_LatestHeadlines" target="_new2">[b]WSJ: Missionary Stumbles on Road to Haiti[/b]</a>

<a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/jan/31/american-baptists-arrested-taking-children" target="new100">[b]American church group held after trying to take children out of Haiti[/b]</a>

[zill]

Aww, I thought it was a cool name of a new band "Haiti and the Missionaries"

[KYYX4ever]

These child traffickers got caught. Period.

[SwampThing]

[quote]I hear your point, but the missionaries appear to be in the wrong here. [/quote]

Yes, but with all the corruption in the courts/government how can we be sure about anything?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/35277307/ns ... arthquake/

<font size="1></font>

[djcraig]

If I was a child living in that shit hole I'd be praying to be abducted. Aliens, Satanists, hell even left wing liberals. Couldn't be any worse than being trapped on that isle.



<a href="http://www.djcraig.net/los_angeles_dj">DJ Craig</a>

[MARV]

[quote][i]Originally posted by djcraig[/i]
<br>If I was a child living in that shit hole I'd be praying to be abducted. Aliens, Satanists, hell even left wing liberals. Couldn't be any worse than being trapped on that isle.



<a href="http://www.djcraig.net/los_angeles_dj">DJ Craig</a>


[/quote]

Anybody but the teabaggers.

<a href="http://s7.photobucket.com/albums/y271/marvymarv/?action=view¤t=tick.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y271/marvymarv/tick.jpg" border="0" alt="Photobucket"></a>

[SallyLightfoot]

I agree with djcraig here-- if I were one of the children, I would still probably want to get the hell out of there at any cost. Nonetheless, it still doesn't make it okay to go into another country and smuggle kids for jesus.

One of the comments from the WSJ article:
<blockquote>... She (Laura Silsby) followed the Liberal plan:

Step 1 - Find a group of people who are in need.
Step 2 - Come up with a plan that breaks laws and tramples the rights of others.
Step 3 - Use other peoples money for your pet project.
Step 4 - When caught, just claim you doing it for the children. Negative unintended consequences be d a m n e d.

Seems pretty much to be the typical liberal/Dem modus operandi.</blockquote>And while I may disagree with the cynicism, I appreciate that this conservative commenter is at least being consistent with his/her principles.

[randy]

look what I [:D]caused.