Haiti kidnapping case; an interesting twist

Those missionaries are not human traffcker's, they just wanted to save some kids. Most of them, if not all of them, except for the head woman, had no idea that proper channels were not being used.

The head woman has gone bankrupt, from what I have read, to help the children of Haiti.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/35387557...ti_earthquake/

Those missionaries have been in Haiti helping the Haitians since way before the earthquake, haven't they?

The children were orphans and other children whose parent could not care for them and knew they were going to be coming to the United States to be adopted and would have a better life. It isn't like they were being sold into slavery or the sex trade. Good grief.

And the judge in the case has found "no evidence of intent to commit a crime" and is expected to release them any day now.

Why don't you just admit you don't like missionaries, no matter how good their intentions?

Here's a little allegory:

About ten years ago, my wife was driving our truck across I-40 in the Texas panhandle. They had had a little snow the previous night, but it was mostly dry and clear, sun was out, and she was doing 62 mph in a 60 mph zone, and getting passed by other trucks.

The famous "Dairy Queen trooper" pulled her over and stood talking to her for about 15 minutes, finally handing her a warning ticket. He admitted that his goal was to slow down the traffic, since there had been a bad truck accident in the area the previous night. He just wanted the other trucks to see her there, report he was out on the job, and hoped it would keep speeds down. He admitted she was actually one of the slower trucks he had come across, but that she was the first one available after he had released the previous truck.

My guess is that the Haitian government arrested these missionaries, knowing full well they were guilty of only being overzealous in their attempts to help the Haitian people, in hopes of staving off worse cases.

And, in my opinion, there is probably not one Haitian government official who could not be sent to prison for a long time for their routine mistreatment of the Haitian people.

Actually, I didn't leave it out. So far as I know, it hadn't been announced yet, the last time I heard any news on it.

As to the missionaries, I would have to say they are probably no better--and no worse--than most of the other NGO's that go into such areas. I'd give them all the benefit of the doubt, at least until investigations are done. And I think virtually all of them are better than the Haitian government, which has sold its people into economic slavery for the last 200 years.

1. I need some proof of your bolded, underlined statement. Got any?


And who cares what one lady says, big deal, people say a lot of things.

All have been released but two.

I did think they had been in Haiti prior to the quake. No?

Oddly enough, I heard that the group was actually in Haiti before the earthquake. Since I mostly listen to news on NPR, I would guess it was there, but I'm not sure.

And it wasn't clear to me whether the organization or this particular group had been there earlier.

I DO know that a lot of the official groups and long-term groups are saying that the huge influx of "helpers," no matter how well-intentioned, are actually making things worse and creating infrastructure burdens.

I can kind of see going either way on a lot of the amputation issue, since there can also be serious consequences from leaving a limb on--I read an article, about a week or two after the earthquake, about people dying from kidney failure because of crushing damage causing toxic reactions in the body; chopping off the crushed limbs in time prevents this complication.

As far as the missionary issue goes, I'm willing to believe that they had the best intentions, but to me that highlights the importance of people knowing what they're doing. I have a friend who wants to find a mission trip to Haiti over spring break; she has no particular skills, and has had kind of a sheltered life, so my best bet is she'd be useless from being completely traumatized by it all, but she had an emotional reaction to the earthquake that she interpreted as being "called" and "ready" to help them, and people jumped in to support her on this. Any organization that says it's trying to help people needs to first be realistic about what they're trying to accomplish, whether they've examined the issues in context, whether people are properly trained, etc.

I am reading your link from the NY Times.

I have to ask. Where are all the agnostic groups? Where are all the Atheist groups? Where are all the Pagan groups? Where are all the Wicca groups? Do none of these groups EVER help people?
In particular the Agnostics and the Atheists, I guess all the Atheist groups do with their money is buy up billboard and bus advertising spaces that says "God is Dead".

What faith based "fiasco" would that be?

How is it a "fiasco"

My money goes to ACORN and other such groups that I don't approve of. I guess we're all getting the shaft from the government.

I can hear a Russian Reversal coming out of this..."In Soviet Russia, money donates you" or something...

Actually, although I can't find the reference right now, I believe they DID release the complete, unedited videos. Those who saw them say they showed, essentially, what we saw, but the publicly released videos had some added footage of the two actors dressed more outrageously than they were when they actually went in the offices.

If you do some checking, I think you'll find ACORN got as much as any faith-based operation, and ACORN has never made any secret that their basic goal is to get Democrats elected.

I'm saying plenty of the faith-based charities are doing what the government should be doing (feeding the hungry, housing the homeless, teaching the uneducated), and they're doing it at a whole lot less cost than the government, and they're doing it because they believe in it, not because they're getting a paycheck to do.

IT doesn't make it right. Seriously how could they not know they needed proper documentation to get these kids out. Just because they feel they would have a better life doesn't give them the right to just take them. I feel like the majority of them didn't even know what was going on and they should have been released. I feel like the leader may have been trying to be self righteous and comment crimes because she is one of those better then thee types of persons who think they can do what they want as long as they think it is right. Maybe im wrong but regardless what they did was stupid and they should have gone through the proper channels.