It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Vaccination Rights Attorney Threatened With Criminal Charges; State Demands Surrender of Client List

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Mar, 8 2012 @ 07:13 PM

A prominent New York Times columnist says the current Catholic Church sex scandals — and many more in America — were caused by the culture of the Irish Catholic Church, which was transferred to America by Irish clergy.

Ross Douthat was writing in his Times blog in a piece titled "The Tragedy of Irish Catholicism." He says the qualities of Irish Catholicism — "qualities which were once a source of immense vitality — seem to have led to a particularly horrifying outcome."

The pedophilia scandal is an example of "how a culture so intensely clerical, so politically high-handed, and so embarrassed (beyond the requirements of Christian doctrine) by human sexuality could magnify the horror of priestly pedophilia, and expand the pool of victims, by producing Bishops inclined to strong-arm the problem out of public sight instead of dealing with it as Christian leaders should."

they run a lot of schools and orphanages

edit on 8-3-2012 by Danbones because: (no reason given)

edit on 8-3-2012 by Danbones because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 8 2012 @ 08:25 PM
reply to post by Danbones

Dear Danbones,

Out of a sense of redemption for any offense I might have caused, I listened to the second hour of the PowerHour. That was the one in which Attorney Finn was going to be discussed. I heard a lot

Neil Miller was the guest for the last two hours of the program. He comes on about 10 minutes into the 2nd hour. He was strongly opposed to vaccines before his wife became pregnant and his research strengthed his belief. I'm not sure he was an unbiased researcher, but, oh well.

The host says the new vaccines aren't to make money, but they have criminal , soulless schemes behind them.

"The polio vaccine gave people cancer." said the host

MILLER Any kind of injenction causes damage to the system, or puncturing the skin. And makes cancer much more likely. (What about scrapes? How come we're not all dead?)

He talks about SV-40, a virus he believes is carried from monkeys to humans getting the polio vaccine. It has been injected into 100,000,000 people from the 50's and 60's and pasees through mother to child and spouse to spouse contact (I would assume that everyone must have it now.) And that's the cause of increases in cancer. (I thought it was puncturing the skin that did it.) It's also linked to AIDS.

About 40 minutes into 2nd hour the attorney gets brought up. Ignored and brought up again at about 50 minutes in. Discussion started at about 55 minutes.

Nothing new on this story, I've lost an hour. Except for the tidbit that there are 20 states that exempt you if you don't want to be vaccinated under a "philosophical exemption."

The third hour was a different topic from Finn, so after about ten minutes I switched off. Feeling frustrated that the source I had put so much hope in had nothing new. (Except, he thought she had filed a civil rights suit, which is, of course a totally wrong type of suit to bring unless she's arguing that they're after her because she's female.)

Well, you got me to listen, good for you.

With respect,

posted on Mar, 8 2012 @ 08:33 PM
reply to post by Danbones

Dear Danbones,

I went to the web site on the Franklin Scandal where I learned it was first exposed in the '90s, used the Nebraska based Boy's Town for a source of kids, who were primarily shipped to D.C. How this has anything to do with New York CPS is completely beyond me.

With respect,

posted on Mar, 8 2012 @ 08:57 PM
reply to post by charles1952

OK Charles you got me
on one little point...

technicalities don't work the same way outside of a courtroom do they?
this is ATS

it isn't like the peadophiles in high places advertise...its a culture of silence..ask the catholics

fact is you haven't disproven the OP
only the lack of references on the internet on small points which are really only deflections

Are you going to tell me why the law went after her client list in the first place?
As a lawyer I would have thought that ought to really concern you...
thats a legal cornerstone, confidentiality no?

you seem to have a problem with the Op's source and I still don't see that you have discredited him...
not in an out of court way....
many readers here have been following the whole pharma vs health controvercy for a long time.
we know at least circumstantially from the preponderance of evidence that we do get whats going on.

we know paedophiles go where the children are.
we see how high the numbers of disappeard children are
we see how high the numbers of CPSed children are
we know the scandals go all the way up the tree
we know about Mk ultra etc
we know about the history of MK40 and how it was in the early polio vaccines and is one of the most cancer causing entities ever discovered.
we have seen the hatchet jobs done to discredit legitimate cures, whistle blowers, and abusers of power
we see cancer rates going to the moon
we know most oncologists won't take chemo if they get cancer they just push it on the disadvantaged.
we know the government has lied while VETERANS get sick and die..More then the enemy has killed

It is obvious you keep trying to lawyer Mike Adams and his supporters when he is proving essentially correct
which Is why I mentioned the other thread to illustrate that..
the article and the author DID exist
you never did prove the source, and author, didn't exist on that thread there
i proved they did.
Harvard proved the article in the op is on track
you just hand me little strawman arguements that are niether here nor there to the OPs sourced to Adams

you ignore the real information about the corporate agenda that you come accross in the references like a lawyer on a mission would

so, I am asking you directly whats your PERSONAL beef with Mike Adams?

edit on 8-3-2012 by Danbones because: (no reason given)

edit on 8-3-2012 by Danbones because: (no reason given)

edit on 8-3-2012 by Danbones because: (no reason given)

edit on 8-3-2012 by Danbones because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 8 2012 @ 09:19 PM
the pedos are in alot of places cps is no exception..and niether is New York

Alarming Investigation into CIA Satanists Child Abuse Ring within Governement,
edit on 8-3-2012 by Danbones because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 8 2012 @ 10:42 PM
reply to post by Danbones

Dear Danbones,

Thanks, this is kind of fun, but I think I'll have to draw to a close soon. I watched the Interview with Finn and I was open-minded until I saw it. Oh, and I don't have anything against Mike Adams, I don't know enough about him. He seems passionate about his beliefs and that's a good thing. To be honest, I hadn't realized, until you mentioned it, that I had commented on another of his articles.

Anyway this is how he introduces Finn:

...who is being, you might say terrorized, certainly suppressed because she represents parents who are trying to defend parental freedom when it comes to the vaccination issue. ....Which would expose those parents to state authorities which could result in those children being taken away, kidnapped by Child Protection Services, a violtaion of basic human rights, a viloation of law, I believe.
Then Ms. Finn starts to talk:

It began in 2009 during a very high-profile case that I handled here in New York....At the time I had two complaints filed against me by clients and a doctor, a pediatrician ...These were minor was advertising and some other very, very, minor things....When I wrote my answer I was accused of lying and there were more charge filed against me....And they served me with something to suspend my license.

From the letter sent to her:

There was a finding that the respondent is guilty of misconduct...."in that she failed to comply with a lawful demand of the Grievance Committee for the Ninth Judicial District with respect to its investigation of her alleged professional misconduct."

"The admonition is based on information posted on your website... The website contains the following statements "The (illegible) law firm represents thousands of children and parents across the U.S. The attorneys already have an impressive record of precedent setting cases.""

"The statement last year that your firm represents thousands of children and parents across is similar to a statement for which you were previously admonished. said prior letter of admonition dated April 6, 2010 found that you could not adequately document the truth of the statement, "Personally, our firm represents nearly three thousand children ...." Please submit a written answer to the allegations contained within ten (10) days of your receipt of this letter. Your answer should include documentation to to support both statements at issue - i.e., a detailed list of the firm's current clients, including docket numbers, and copies of any and all precedent setting cases in which your firm was inolved."

So she lied about how many clients she had and was admonished in 2010, a wrist slap that should have woken her up. Then she makes a claim in her advertising of questionable validity, nearly the same as the one she was admonished for but bigger. She was told, prove you're not lying again. And she's upset about it.
Finally, in her interview, she says:

Practicing law is a joke. I make absolutely no money whatsoever and now they want to come and take my license from me? You know what, they can have it."
She's probably found the right solution.

From the evidence provided by both sides in that interview, she appears to be a liar, and unconcerned with the ethics of her profession. The truth is out there. She's the bad one. And there's a case against her without even looking at the vaccine issue, which I suspect is a self-promotion ploy, and sympathy play.

With respect,

posted on Mar, 9 2012 @ 06:12 AM
fair enough Charles
well played
I'll star that
thats a very good closing arguement

edit on 9-3-2012 by Danbones because: (no reason given)

edit on 9-3-2012 by Danbones because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 9 2012 @ 07:57 PM
Regarding the polio vaccine causing cancer. Correlation doesn't equal causation. Where, exactly, is the study that supposedly proves this? Did they get cancer immediately after the vaccine? Did cancer appear years later? What? Big claims require big evidence.

All I know is that my dad wished he'd been vaccinated before contracting polio as a child. The long term effects, even now, aren't fun.

posted on Mar, 9 2012 @ 10:38 PM
And here a Exellent and (not too mindboggling) article about SV40 and Cancer.

top topics

<< 1   >>

log in