gardenmom5 Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 I read an article today about a mom who made her 13 year old son sleep outside on the porch (with a pillow and blanket) because he was late for curfew. She was arrested for deprivation of a minor. The Naugler's are pretty lucky. I'd consider nearly everything they do depriving their minor children. cps was probably left scratching their heads just on where to start. that would be a very very long list. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corraleno Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 What happened to the Nasty Homestead FB page? Too much drama due to stuff that happened on another page, which really had nothing to do with the Nasty page, but bled over to it. The person who started the Nasty page started over with a new page, called The Naugler Report. Not much on it yet, though. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corraleno Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 The result of Joe's hearing today was that he is set for trial in August on the charges of threatening the neighbor who caught him stealing water. There were rumors that he was offered a plea deal and turned it down against his lawyer's advice, but that's speculation at this point. They are supposed to be in court tomorrow regarding the suit they filed against CPS. The original CPS court date was June 18th, I think. I don't know if that one is still in place, or if what happens tomorrow will change that. Nicole's court date on the charges of resisting arrest and disturbing the peace is in July. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gardenmom5 Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 The result of Joe's hearing today was that he is set for trial in August on the charges of threatening the neighbor who caught him stealing water. There were rumors that he was offered a plea deal and turned it down against his lawyer's advice, but that's speculation at this point. They are supposed to be in court tomorrow regarding the suit they filed against CPS. The original CPS court date was June 18th, I think. I don't know if that one is still in place, or if what happens tomorrow will change that. Nicole's court date on the charges of resisting arrest and disturbing the peace is in July. except knowing joe's extreme arrogance, I can absolutely see him going against a lawyer's advice for a plea agreement. the best thing that can happen is he spends some time behind bars and Nicole get's some mental health help. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gardenmom5 Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 don't know how I ended up with a dp. . . . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heather in VA Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 The result of Joe's hearing today was that he is set for trial in August on the charges of threatening the neighbor who caught him stealing water. There were rumors that he was offered a plea deal and turned it down against his lawyer's advice, but that's speculation at this point. They are supposed to be in court tomorrow regarding the suit they filed against CPS. The original CPS court date was June 18th, I think. I don't know if that one is still in place, or if what happens tomorrow will change that. Nicole's court date on the charges of resisting arrest and disturbing the peace is in July. Is this the lawsuit with the rumor they were going to assert sovereignty and claim their children are property? I know it was just a rumor but with them rumors turn out to be true even when they are outlandish. Besides, under what other grounds would they sue CPS? I would assume with a court date on the books (June 18th) to discuss custody they couldn't just sue to get the kids back without some kind of legal angle. Although calling the sovereign argument a 'legal angle' is really pushing that term. It will be interesting to hear how it goes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TeenagerMom Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 Is this the lawsuit with the rumor they were going to assert sovereignty and claim their children are property? I know it was just a rumor but with them rumors turn out to be true even when they are outlandish. Besides, under what other grounds would they sue CPS? I would assume with a court date on the books (June 18th) to discuss custody they couldn't just sue to get the kids back without some kind of legal angle. Although calling the sovereign argument a 'legal angle' is really pushing that term. It will be interesting to hear how it goes. They went to court on the lawsuit this a.m. They just updated that the children would not be returned today and they are devastated. Their attempt at filing to get the kids returned (rumored) failed. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jean in Newcastle Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 Nicole's words copied and pasted: "The reunification of our family has been delayed another week. We are devastated that the children are not returning home today. We want the world to know our children, Jacob, Quinten, Abigail, Isaac, Zachary, Olivia, Urijah, Ezra, Lucas, and Mosiah. Their voices have been kept silent. They are young adults, and tender children, and they have been treated like property. We want their wishes known and respected. We will continue to fight for our family’s rights. We will continue to work very closely with all agencies involved and have complied with every request." I find it interesting that she complains that the children are treated like property if indeed their argument was that the children were their property. I also find it head smacking the level of denial and delusion that is there when she says that they've worked closely with the agencies and have complied with every request when they have done so little to actually clean up their "homestead". 9 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tanaqui Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 We don't let children do or have everything they want just because they want it. In the normal course of things it would be better for them to be with their parents. However, the property is in such bad shape that this would not be healthy for them or in their best interests... and I bet dollars to doughnuts that the local authorities have the same vibe I do, which is that if the parents had unsupervised access to all the kids at once they'd run for the state border rather than make any positive changes to their living situation. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Butter Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 and Mosiah. Mosiah is an ancient LDS prophet from the Book of Mormon. It's weird how many people I know/have heard of who have left the Church who gave their kids LDS names. (Granted, many do not leave - my own daughter has the middle name of Sariah.) /totally random comment that does not contribute anything of substance to the conversation 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corraleno Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 I find it interesting that she complains that the children are treated like property if indeed their argument was that the children were their property. I also find it head smacking the level of denial and delusion that is there when she says that they've worked closely with the agencies and have complied with every request when they have done so little to actually clean up their "homestead". No kidding! I really don't know if they are truly that delusional, or if they're just doing whatever it takes to continue to manipulate their nutty supporters and keep the money rolling in. I think the "sovereignty" argument was just speculation and that what they actually filed was probably more along the lines of a motion to dismiss the case on the grounds that the actions of CPS and the police were illegal and "unconstitutional." They seem to be really hung up on the timing of the warrant, even though it's been explained to them over and over that the police followed all proper procedures. The one thing I am most curious about is whether they have actually received any kind of "case plan" from CPS yet, or if their claims to have "complied with every request" are just based on the few things that happened to be listed in the warrant (unfenced pond and burn pit, broken glass). I don't believe for one minute that those are the only things CPS has issue with — those were just things the police listed when they were in a hurry to get the warrant signed. 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heather in VA Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 If you want to completely lose faith in humanity, read some of the responses to Nicole's FB post about not getting the kids today. Wow - these people are nuts. I am especially fond of the one that said "Don't quite understand not letting the children come home and yes I saw the pics and not my ideal living environment but children are returned to worse environment and end up dead" Oh yea - they aren't dead so it's fine. That's a great attitude. 7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mamaraby Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 Mosiah is an ancient LDS prophet from the Book of Mormon. Thank you! I couldn't figure out where she came up with Mosiah - was it just a clever or unique way to name her kid Josiah, but with an M instead of a J, but I was too lazy to Google. lol 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heather in VA Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 Mosiah is an ancient LDS prophet from the Book of Mormon. It's weird how many people I know/have heard of who have left the Church who gave their kids LDS names. (Granted, many do not leave - my own daughter has the middle name of Sariah.) /totally random comment that does not contribute anything of substance to the conversation I think it contributes to the conversation. I didn't realize Mosiah had that link. I noticed the names of her kids got a little more unusual as she had more so I just assumed this was part of the pattern. Thanks for the info. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corraleno Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 If you want to completely lose faith in humanity, read some of the responses to Nicole's FB post about not getting the kids today. Wow - these people are nuts. I am especially fond of the one that said "Don't quite understand not letting the children come home and yes I saw the pics and not my ideal living environment but children are returned to worse environment and end up dead" Oh yea - they aren't dead so it's fine. That's a great attitude. Most of the Nauglers' supporters are just dumb (and a significant percentage have had their own run-ins with CPS or have family or friends who have been "unfairly" treated by them), but some are truly scary. One of them, Breck, is like an attack dog — he not only calls people really vile names, but he has been digging up, and posting, personal info on people that criticize the Nauglers (including things like old arrest records and pictures of their children) in order to punish them and scare them off. Some of those people are seriously unhinged. :blink: 7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Word Nerd Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 If you want to completely lose faith in humanity, read some of the responses to Nicole's FB post about not getting the kids today. Wow - these people are nuts. According to one commenter, this is all the neighbor's fault for not giving water to thirsty children. Incidentally, I'm not at all surprised to see that a blowhard I had run-ins with years ago on another homeschooling board is one of the commenters/supporters. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heather in VA Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 According to one commenter, this is all the neighbor's fault for not giving water to thirsty children. Incidentally, I'm not at all surprised to see that a blowhard I had run-ins with years ago on another homeschooling board is one of the commenters/supporters. Well of course, if your neighbor wants to have 10 kids and not work causing the kids to be hungry and basically homeless then it's your responsibility to give them whatever they want. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Word Nerd Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 Well of course, if your neighbor wants to have 10 kids and not work causing the kids to be hungry and basically homeless then it's your responsibility to give them whatever they want. And if someone threatens you with a gun when you tell him to stop taking your water, you're still the bad guy. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gardenmom5 Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 Nicole's words copied and pasted: "The reunification of our family has been delayed another week. We are devastated that the children are not returning home today. We want the world to know our children, Jacob, Quinten, Abigail, Isaac, Zachary, Olivia, Urijah, Ezra, Lucas, and Mosiah. Their voices have been kept silent. They are young adults, and tender children, and they have been treated like property. We want their wishes known and respected. We will continue to fight for our family’s rights. We will continue to work very closely with all agencies involved and have complied with every request." I find it interesting that she complains that the children are treated like property if indeed their argument was that the children were their property. I also find it head smacking the level of denial and delusion that is there when she says that they've worked closely with the agencies and have complied with every request when they have done so little to actually clean up their "homestead". that's rich coming from her. she treats them like slaves and makes them do all the work. I actually hope they never get the kids back. they are just too unhinged. I think Nicole believes it, and joe will go along as it "keeps her happy". all he cares about is his next score. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spryte Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 Question about the stealing water: does this mean that the husband and a gaggle of presumably not-clean kids tromped up to someone's house and tried to use their outdoor faucet or hose? Or is there another way to steal water? Looking for clarification. I keep imagining a herd of kids and a mean man bungling through someone's garden or property and making a mess and noise, along with stealing water. Not sure if that's accurate. Would there be trespassing charges as well? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maize Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 It really strains credulity for them to act shocked at not immediately getting their kids back when we know they have been through this process before and lost custody of a child. If Nicole really believe the things she posts she is truly delusional. And that is just all around sad for everyone involved :( 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corraleno Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 Question about the stealing water: does this mean that the husband and a gaggle of presumably not-clean kids tromped up to someone's house and tried to use their outdoor faucet or hose? Or is there another way to steal water? Looking for clarification. I keep imagining a herd of kids and a mean man bungling through someone's garden or property and making a mess and noise, along with stealing water. Not sure if that's accurate. Would there be trespassing charges as well? I think he had two of the kids with him at the time. The neighbor's story is that when she & her mother told Joe to leave, he told one of the kids to get his gun from the truck, and then told her that he knew where she lived and would be back. Of course Joe claims that he didn't have a gun, never threatened her, and that they had a long-standing arrangement with the neighbor to get water from their well but she changed her mind because he unfriended her on FB. :001_rolleyes: One of many things that doesn't add up about their story is that the Nauglers say the reason they've never tested or used the well that's on their own property is because the water in that area is high in sulphur so many people bring in bottled water anyway. So if well water there is too nasty to drink, then why are they taking well water from their neighbors? Either their well water is fine but it's just easier to take it from someone else than have their own well inspected (and fixed if necessary), or their neighbors are on city water and they were stealing city water that their neighbors pay for. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heather in VA Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 She also mentions that her reunification with her children has been delayed another week. She's making it sound like she seriously believes she's going to get the kids back at the hearing in a week which is either delusional or calculated. Not to mention I thought her next court date was the 18th which is in 2 weeks. I still don't understand why they got this court date when they already had one set for the 18th. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heather in VA Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 I think he had two of the kids with him at the time. The neighbor's story is that when she & her mother told Joe to leave, he told one of the kids to get his gun from the truck, and then told her that he knew where she lived and would be back. Of course Joe claims that he didn't have a gun, never threatened her, and that they had a long-standing arrangement with the neighbor to get water from their well but she changed her mind because he unfriended her on FB. :001_rolleyes: One of many things that doesn't add up about their story is that the Nauglers say the reason they've never tested or used the well that's on their own property is because the water in that area is high in sulphur so many people bring in bottled water anyway. So if well water there is too nasty to drink, then why are they taking well water from their neighbors? Either their well water is fine but it's just easier to take it from someone else than have their own well inspected (and fixed if necessary), or their neighbors are on city water and they were stealing city water that their neighbors pay for. You are making a cardinal mistake when dealing with the Nauglers. You are applying logic to their statements. That will drive you crazy. Your job is to believe everything they say even if it makes no sense and there is ample evidence to the contrary. 8 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corraleno Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 She also mentions that her reunification with her children has been delayed another week. She's making it sound like she seriously believes she's going to get the kids back at the hearing in a week which is either delusional or calculated. Not to mention I thought her next court date was the 18th which is in 2 weeks. I still don't understand why they got this court date when they already had one set for the 18th. Today's hearing and the one on the 18th have different case numbers, and I think someone posted that this one was in civil court and the other one is in juvenile court. So it appears that this hearing was an attempt to get the custody case dismissed, which pretty much everyone except Joe & Nicole knew would not succeed. (Joe & Nicole may have known it, too, and are just playing the parts their audience wants to see.) People who deal with CPS seem to think that the hearing on the 18th (assuming that date is correct) is a review hearing, where they'll review what (if any) progress the parents have made, what additional recommendations CPS has, and whether any changes should be made to the visitation schedule. AFAIK, Nicole has not posted about any more visits beyond that one weekend when they claimed to have spent 4 days living with all the kids in one foster home. She's just made vague statements claiming that they do have "communication and visitation" with the kids, but she can't really talk about it because she doesn't want to expose the kids or the foster families. As if she hasn't been exposing and exploiting those kids for their entire lives. :001_rolleyes: 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miss Peregrine Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 I feel dumb for missing this but what was the event that precipitated the authorities getting involved? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hkpiano Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 Mosiah is an ancient LDS prophet from the Book of Mormon. It's weird how many people I know/have heard of who have left the Church who gave their kids LDS names. (Granted, many do not leave - my own daughter has the middle name of Sariah.) /totally random comment that does not contribute anything of substance to the conversation I found that interesting too!! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heather in VA Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 Today's hearing and the one on the 18th have different case numbers, and I think someone posted that this one was in civil court and the other one is in juvenile court. So it appears that this hearing was an attempt to get the custody case dismissed, which pretty much everyone except Joe & Nicole knew would not succeed. (Joe & Nicole may have known it, too, and are just playing the parts their audience wants to see.) People who deal with CPS seem to think that the hearing on the 18th (assuming that date is correct) is a review hearing, where they'll review what (if any) progress the parents have made, what additional recommendations CPS has, and whether any changes should be made to the visitation schedule. AFAIK, Nicole has not posted about any more visits beyond that one weekend when they claimed to have spent 4 days living with all the kids in one foster home. She's just made vague statements claiming that they do have "communication and visitation" with the kids, but she can't really talk about it because she doesn't want to expose the kids or the foster families. As if she hasn't been exposing and exploiting those kids for their entire lives. :001_rolleyes: Thanks - I saw her comments about not wanting to expose or exploit the kids but she had no problem putting all of their names in today's post about the hearing. I've noticed there has been no talk about additional work on the "homestead". Is there a chance they haven't been told what needs to be upgraded to get the kids back? I would think that CPS would have to tell them what to improve on in order to even have a 'review' hearing. Clearly they have to be told outright since they don't seem to see anything wrong themselves. Someone also mentioned it was quite likely one requirement would be a mental health review and drug test for both of them and the suspicion is that they won't comply with that. Since we only get news from her I doubt we will hear an update on that. June 18th will roll around and she'll report that despite following everything CPS told her they refuse to return her children because they want to make money and exploit them. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corraleno Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 I think it's possible (even likely) that they haven't been told everything that needs to be done because CPS hasn't completed their investigation yet. If the kids are playing POW, and following their parents' orders not to say anything about the way they live, then it could take a while to get the information they need. They're probably interviewing various neighbors, former bosses, members of their former church, and anyone else who might have information about the kids, about the parents' mental health, and any possible abuse. They're probably asking for records pertaining to the termination of Joe's parental rights in Alex's case, too. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gardenmom5 Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 It really strains credulity for them to act shocked at not immediately getting their kids back when we know they have been through this process before and lost custody of a child. If Nicole really believe the things she posts she is truly delusional. And that is just all around sad for everyone involved :( I think she's delusional. How far is open to debate. Joe's just a creep. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heather in VA Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 I think she's delusional. How far is open to debate. Joe's just a creep. Very true. I would be really surprised if Joe has any actual political views. He believes whatever will suit his purposes and get Nicole riled up enough to back him up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jean in Newcastle Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 Supporters are saying that CPS and the judge and the sheriff are all in cahoots in order to make money off of keeping the children. . . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gardenmom5 Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 Supporters are saying that CPS and the judge and the sheriff are all in cahoots in order to make money off of keeping the children. . . has anyone of these delusional paranoids said "how" they make money by taking kids? after all - the taxpayers of Kentucky - of which the cps workers and judge are some - are now paying for them to be in foster homes. to quote westly- their logic is truly dizzying. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corraleno Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 has anyone of these delusional paranoids said "how" they make money by taking kids? after all - the taxpayers of Kentucky - of which the cps workers and judge are some - are now paying for them to be in foster homes. to quote westly- their logic is truly dizzying. Well they only kidnap the cute, well-behaved ones, because those are the most adoptable, and then they sell them to people who want to adopt. And no, that's not sarcasm, that is what some of those people truly believe. :blink: 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corraleno Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 I feel really sorry for Nicole's mom. It must be so hard to watch all this happen from 1000 miles away, seeing her grandbabies living in total filth and watching her daughter's descent into mental illness, and not being able to do anything about it. Heartbreaking. :sad: 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spryte Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 I feel really sorry for Nicole's mom. It must be so hard to watch all this happen from 1000 miles away, seeing her grandbabies living in total filth and watching her daughter's descent into mental illness, and not being able to do anything about it. Heartbreaking. :sad: Yes, it must be excruciating. :( Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heather in VA Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 I feel really sorry for Nicole's mom. It must be so hard to watch all this happen from 1000 miles away, seeing her grandbabies living in total filth and watching her daughter's descent into mental illness, and not being able to do anything about it. Heartbreaking. :sad: Do we know why she isn't able to do anything about it? Did she try to get temporary custody when they were removed? I am not judging her if she didn't. I'm just wondering. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gardenmom5 Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 Well they only kidnap the cute, well-behaved ones, because those are the most adoptable, and then they sell them to people who want to adopt. And no, that's not sarcasm, that is what some of those people truly believe. :blink: maybe they're sent somewhere for their organs to be harvested. (and yeah, I've heard of some who think that.) it is truly sad that some people can be that out of touch with reality. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Word Nerd Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 And then there's this one:Obama wants to take everyone's children and put them in homes near schools. Parents will get to visit and that is it. It is in the AGenda 21 plan. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ErinE Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 And then there's this one: Obama wants to take everyone's children and put them in homes near schools. Parents will get to visit and that is it. It is in the AGenda 21 plan. Dare I ask... What's the Agenda 21 plan? I haven't heard of it. Maybe I'm in on it, and I just don't know it. Should I expect my notification any day now? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renai Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 Agenda 21, eh? That's...odd. NLH is back. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renai Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 And then there's this one: Obama wants to take everyone's children and put them in homes near schools. Parents will get to visit and that is it. It is in the AGenda 21 plan. How does this interpretation come out of a global sustainability project?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ErinE Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 Okay,I just did a Google search for Agenda 21, and I didn't even have to open any of the links to see how nutty that is.... You are a braver person than I... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Katy Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 Agenda 21, like the science fiction book written by Glenn Beck? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heather in VA Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 And then there's this one: Obama wants to take everyone's children and put them in homes near schools. Parents will get to visit and that is it. It is in the AGenda 21 plan. wow - I am no fan of Obama policies in general but this is definitely not one of them Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Butter Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 Agenda 21, like the science fiction book written by Glenn Beck? Glenn Beck actually didn't write the book. One of his listeners, Harriet Parke, wrote it and he basically looked at it, liked it, did some editing, and put his name on it so it'd sell. He's never kept that a secret, nor has Ms. Parke. It's actually a good book and is the absolute worst case scenario of what could happen if people went totally wacko with Agenda 21 and carried it to the furthest craziness possible. It's dystopian fiction, which usually does take ideas to the furthest craziness possible. Most people who are terrified of the real Agenda 21 do not understand likely implementation and, since they are the scary government is evil type, like to run around like chickens with their heads cut off proclaiming the sky is falling down because of this - right now. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brehon Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 And then there's this one: Obama wants to take everyone's children and put them in homes near schools. Parents will get to visit and that is it. It is in the AGenda 21 plan. Darn it!! The plan's been outed. <goes off to plan Agenda 22 wherein Operation Brave New World is executed> 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Butter Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 And then there's this one: Obama wants to take everyone's children and put them in homes near schools. Parents will get to visit and that is it. It is in the AGenda 21 plan. I actually know someone who totally believes this is going to happen. She posts links from Arne Duncan a lot "proving" it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gardenmom5 Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 How does this interpretation come out of a global sustainability project?? there you go again - expecting them to be logical and rational and actually think things through. smh. 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LucyStoner Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 I feel dumb for missing this but what was the event that precipitated the authorities getting involved? IIRC: 1. The dad threatening a neighbor who this family was stealing water from. At one point told a child to get a gun. 2. One or more CPS calls made by neighbors about the state of the property and that the kids were dirty and not enrolled in school. 3. The Naughler's absolute refusal to cooperate with a basic CPS check of their "home" or a welfare check of their kids. 4. The CPS workers sized up the living situation when they weren't "home" and got an order for an emergency removal. 5. The sheriff followed up on the removal order, mom and dad are both recorded saying insane things and I think the mom assaulted an officer. 8 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.