In case you were wondering, I have yet to find one person who attacked Michael Schiavo who has acknowledged the results of the DCF report exonerating him of charges of abuse and neglect. And before you forget, what were some of those charges?
In at least one case, the caller found the evidence of Terri Schiavo’s alleged abuse on the Internet. In January 2004, a female caller reported that Terri Schiavo had an infection on her stomach, at the site of her feeding tube, that was not being treated. But, when questioned, she said she had no first-hand knowledge. She “stated that her information on current infections and lack of treatment was from Yahoo chatline,” the report said.
She found it on the internets. Fabulous. I guess if the internet is good enough for Bill Frist to make a diagnosis on Terri Schiavo, an internet rumor is probably good enough for some crank to trigger an investigation. After all, this is becoming know-nothing nation, where the louder and dumber you are, the more attention you get.
She probably was reading Bryan Preston, who was busy calling everyone Pontius Pilate. Or maybe she was reading the Empire Journal. Or Misha, who had this to say about Michael Schiavo:
No matter what, we breathe a sigh of relief that he won’t be allowed to murder his wife just yet and hope and pray that he’ll be hit by a truck before the legal system either lets him carry out his plan or sets a horrible precedent by deciding that the State’s wishes must prevail over the wishes of spouses.
Apparently, God was on vacation, but I am not. I am going to wait a couple more days, and then I am just going to have to do a big round-up of those who don;t have the nerve to admit they were wrong.
At any rate, where is this self-correcting blogosphere? I saw literally thousands of accusations of abuse- where are the corrections? The only thing I have been able to find at the Corner, which used to be “All Schiavo All the Time” before it became “All Pope All The Time,” is this:
heard this morning that Dean made a speech over the weekend in which he said he plans to make Schiavo a big campaign issue in the next two cycles. If he’s serious, THAT’s a bonehead move. The seemingly pro-death polls on Schiavo were dependent on two things (a) misinformation spawned by the media about basic facts of the case, and (b) the high emotion of the days prior to Terri’s death. A campaign that scrutinizes what happened in Florida is most likely to correct the misinformation — and may even swing things in the other direction (given that the pro-life forces correctly predicted worse cases like the one down in Georgia, and that all the legislative movement at the state level seems to be in the direction of tightening laws to prevent someone like Terri from being killed by someone like her husband under ambiguous circumstances). Plus, how is Dean ever gonna sell that a bandwagon Ralph Nader and Jesse Jackson leaped on with both feet is somehow a right-wing assault on civil liberties?
Let’s go through this again. Republicans act disgracefully, spread all sorts of lies, violate the concept of marriage, create special legislation to intrude into people’s lives, villianize Michael Schiavo, enlist Randall Terry and a group of fruits and nuts on a jihad, have half the elected Congress attacking the judiciary, and have generally exposed themselves as wild-eyed, bible-thumping, pseudo-fascists lunatics who will say anything and on the surface appear more dangerous than the MoveOn and A.N.S.W.E.R. crowd, yet if Dean mentions the Schiavo affair during th election season, it is going to hurt…. DEMOCRATS?
What flavor is the kool-aid today, Andrew?
And what was the truth about Terri Schiavo’s care:
DCF investigators said they made unannounced visits to Woodside Hospice and interviewed the facilities’ doctors before clearing the cases.
“She appeared to be well cared for and here were no signs of any medical problems or distress,” one 2003 DCF report noted.
“…During the time Mrs. Schiavo has been a patient of hospice, the spouse has always been courteous and very compassionate toward his wife,” the investigator continued. “They (staff) have never heard him make any statements pertaining to wanting her to die. He is rarely alone with her when he visits and has never compromised her care.”
Who you going to believe- the demagogues or your lying eyes?
RW
I never attacked the husband because I thought the governmental intervention was wrong (although I did state the obvious – his adultery was indeed a factor that many used to forumulate their opinions).
That said, those who said that a theocracy was just around the corner…..well, ’nuff said.
Gotta watch the demagogues, indeed.
Aaron
I sympathize for Christians when they feel their rights are being trampled or are being made to feel guilty for being religious.
It’s when the extremists attempt to force their religion on everything and everyone that it freaks me out.
Though, I guess they have that right to attempt this, but it loses voters when pushed to these extremes. Death is a very personal matter – and maybe a on a less personal scale a debate is good, but when you bring in one family / person as an example…
John Cole
Ricky- I never said theocracy was right around the corner. I did argue that DeLay and his ilk had enlisted the theocrats, and that we should all be scared what they are tryting to accomplish.
Mona
The Corner alludes to the case of Mae Magourik, in Georgia. I cannot tell you what BS it was how some in the blogosphere trumpeted this as the “result” of Schiavo. The quiet, private guardian in that case, Beth Gaddy, was being depicted all over the ‘net as equally villainous as Michael Schiavo.
People at Wizbang were pontificating WRONGLY about Georgia law pertaining to guardianship appts, and also what the judge in that case had actually ordered. They were ignorant of what was actually going on with Mae — all parties were waiting on a panel of three doctors to determine the proper course of her care, but there was evidence that Mae HERSELF was refusing most food. She did that while lucid. But the conspiracy theorists had Beth Gaddy keeping Mae doped up so she would refuse & etc. ad nauseum based on RUMOR AND CONJECTURE. I did my best, as did a few others, to set all these crazed fanatics straight, but all that did was inflame them. They didn’t want the TRUTH, because that takes all the fun out of it.
I guess this is to be the new entertainment among some on the right. Find a guardianship case in which a PVS or elderly and ill ward are involved, and pounce! Depict private people and judges as vile and “pro-death.” Turn private people into monsters, for fun and recreation.
Schiavo and Magourik won’t be the end of it. There will be more, so that some online can feel like self-important “saviors” and thus give meaning to their lives. And don’t bother them with facts– they don’t like them.
Lee
Mona–you sound so self-righteous. Again, if people attacked the huspand and you disagree, don’t lump all ‘Christians’ into your condescending category. I felt a lot of sympathy for Terri. Much more than her huspand. He could have been portrayed as mother theresa and it wouldn’t have changed her mind. “There will be more”… what, lives that people want to snuff out (or end because they feel it’s not ‘quality’)? I am stunned by the condescension I hear (I know it’s from both sides of the argument) from people because this woman has passed on and people disagree with the way it was done. I think Michael a cheeseball. That was my impression. But that doesn’t translate into thinking all who disagree are doomed to hell…and i don’t think most who feel my way think that way either. they are just passionate about their beliefs. Like Kermit, or kimmit, or whatevertheheck his name is.
Mona
Lee, I said nothing at all about Xians, and did not lump them into anything. Fact is, some non-Xians have jumped gleefully into this new Internet sport of targeting guardians and judges for public vilification. The effort was lead in the “real world” by religious loons such as Randall Terry and Atty David Gibbs, and a frightening amount of influence by the truly theocratic “Christian Reconstructionists.”
But the Internet mob manufacturing conspiracy theories and ranting in certitude that first Michael Schiavo, and then Beth Gaddy, are evil people conspiring with corrupt judges and doctors, I’ve seen that all over the right blogosphere, and not all participating are particularly religious.
It is the new online game, for some: intrude into private family matters regarding the medical care of a ward, and lynch the guardian, the judge and the medical facilities. Spin wild and fantastic narratives to make all of these as perfectly vile as possible. Facts don’t matter, nor understanding of a jurisdiction’s laws. This is a cyber-circus that will strike again, to the great harm of private folks and their families.
It is shameful. I voted for Bush in ’04, and used to read some of these blogs and enjoy them. Now, I am appalled.
Senator Blutarsky
The “go ahead, Howard, make our day” crowd is missing the point here, which is understandable, given Dean’s typically inarticulate speech.
But if you read his remarks in their entirety, it’s apparent that Dean intends to make Delay, not Schiavo, his poster child in upcoming elections.
The problem with this strategy for Dean and the Democrats isn’t that they’ll appear ghoulish, but that they’ll lack credibility.
Dean wants to convince us that the Democrats have suddenly found religion (sorry, can’t resist) and have become the party that opposes state intrusion into people’s lives? That’s a tough sell, IMO.
Kimmitt
and have become the party that opposes state intrusion into people’s lives?
Dems have been pro-choice for a long, long time. The division has always been that Dems like to tell you what to do with your money and Repubs like to tell you what to do with your body and family.
S Ty
For anyone to impute that democrats lack religious constituents is an insult.
John, you’re doing fine work with this blog, keep it up!
Check this:
http://www.silt3.com/index.php?id=698
Senator Blutarsky
You have a point about the Dems being pro-choice, of course. But Dean seems to indicate that Delay is upping the stakes here (which I won’t necessarily argue with) and that we can trust the Dems to keep the government out of our lives now.
To me, that last point is going to need some work. Although I suppose the Dems could just try to settle for a “lesser of two evils” approach…
KC
Who you gonna believe–the demagogues or your lying eyes?
That question was answered in the elections last November.
over it
Not all questions that are answered are answered correctly. Something tells me that there are many people that feel as though they answered incorrectly last November. John may well be one of these folks himself.
Winning the vote does not mean you are in the right(right as in ‘correct’..not as in ‘conservative’). Hitler won the vote by a far greater margin than Bush. And, before you jump on it, NO…I am NOT comparing Bush to Hitler.
Demagogues rely upon lying eyes. Depend upon the populace believing one thing despite all evidence to the contrary.
Jeff G
Bush one because he brought out voters who believed in his foreign policy.
The social cons are just loud and organized; and the media is skillfully hightlighting them, because they know that it is precisely this kind of moral scold affection that alienates moderate voters. Dean is an idiot, but he’s correct that the moral posturing and intrusion into people’s private lives currently on offer by the Repubs are going to put people off.
The liberal nannystatism and PC horseshit advocated by progressives is bad enough. But so long as Republicans are on the ones featured moralizing on our tv screens every night, it is Republicans who are going to suffer come election time.
Jeff G
That should be Bush “won.” Fussy baby makes Jeff distracted.
Kimmitt
and the media is skillfully hightlighting them,
Not . . . really, no. The MSM is pretty thoroughly spoonfed at this point. If people are running stories on DeLay’s perfidy, I’m pretty sure it’s because the White House faxed a bunch of reporters some interesting stories.
Jay
violate the concept of marriage
I’m sorry, but when I got married the vows were, “until death do us part.”
Michael Schiavo (and I’ve never raised the abuse angle) violated the concept of marriage when he decided to engage in sex outside of his marriage. He then compounded that concept by having children with another woman, while still married to his wife.
And I don’t want to hear any crap about how her parents encourged him to date because that doesn’t fly nor does it make it right.
In addition, he suffered from a little self-absorption when he claimed in an interview with Larry King that Terry Schiavo’s parents were doing what they were doing simply to “make his life hell.”
He certainly didn’t deserve the attacks he faced, but let’s not nominate the man for sainthood just yet either.
RW
Putting an “X” in place of the name of the risen savior says it all, Mona.
BTW, the source for the “rumor” and “conjecture” didn’t derive from the net….it was from Mae Magourik’s grandson. I know because, as a lifelong Georgia resident, I read it.
IOW, you can come down form your high horse, hon, or else get your Xing facts straight, yourself, instead of playing the role of weary martyr.
RW
More likely, they get it from kos, Drum, Kleiman and atrios, much like some ill-informed commenters we all know so well.
KC
This is definitely one of the most interesting commment rooms. I guess that says John’s got a pretty insightful website.
FC
Putting an X in the place of the name of your risen savior (I’m Jewish), is a greek shortning. That’s 0/2, and you owe the world another apology for leaping to conclusions.
http://www.bartleby.com/61/80/X0008000.html
Mona
RW, you are betraying your ignorance. The shorthand “Xian” or “Xtian,” and Xt for Christ has been used since the Church Fathers were around, by XIANS! It is from Greek. I was a religious studies major, and my religious profs employed this shorthand on the blackboard all the time. Google for some Xian college syllabi and you will find it used BY THEM. It appears in British and American genealogical and church cemetery records.
And yes, Ken Mullinax contacted the Schiavo media machine; he is a well-practiced political operative who did that, rather than simply file a post-hearing motion in court; if Beth Gaddy was violating court orders or in any way doing something wrong. He got himself a good deal of attention, but at the expense of the truth. The judge in that case has been quoted as being absolutely ASTONISHED at what Mullinax was claiming in the media. I raised this point of the simple expedient of a post-hearing emergency motion elsewhere, and was told Ken could not be expected to go back before a corrupt judge!
This is insanity.
Quiddity
John,
I eagerly await your report on those bloggers who have not issued a correction about Michael Shiavo. It’s time consuming having to check for retractions.
Go to it!
Mona
RW, I did a brief google on the use of “Xian” or Xtian” in course syllabi, and found scads, way to many to wade through. Here is: INSTRUCTOR: ROBERT GERLICH, S.J. (get that, S.J. = Jesuit priest) writing his syllabus for WESTERN INTELLECTUAL HISTORY A315-001 FALL SEMESTER 2002. Therein the good father from Loyola writes: “Birth of Xtian Philosophy”
I could not tell what university the syllabus at this link is from: http://re-xs.ucsm.ac.uk/cupboard/exam/examsupp/dloads/plans/megcp.htm
But on that page is: “Half Term Seven
Introduction to the coursework
Doing the coursework – Xtian perspectives”
I’m going off topic here, but your trying to undermine my views on this Schiavo and Magourik hysteria with claims that I am anti-Xian for employing a commonly used, totally respectful shorthand used by SCADS of Xians themselves from time immemorial, hopefully demonstrates your significant ignorance.
ppgaz
When ends justify means, then facts don’t really matter.
When the goal is to rile up the chorus of the nutrights, it only matters that they get riled up, not that they were told the truth, or even told that the truth makes a difference. Truth is in the outcome.
Why this continues to surprise anybody, I have no idea. It does little good to point out the truth to people to whom truth is just an impediment to their goals. These are people who would rush to embrace tyranny in the pursuit of their agenda.
RW
I’m not trying to undermine anything, Mona. I simply put forth some info about her grandson. If you don’t like it, refute it.
Point noted on the “X”. There are some who accept it (and a plethora that don’t, which you refuse to acknowledge, but I realize the forum and will take what I can get).
You are ignorant on Magourik’s grandson.
Let’s see if you can note in kind.
This isn’t Greece and it’s not “Xmas” and it’s not “Xian”.
If you didn’t know before, you do now.
JG
‘Bush one because he brought out voters who believed in his foreign policy. ‘
Bush won because Rove put gay marriage on the ballot in swing states. Otherwise lots of people don’t even head to the polls and Kerry wins. Uneducated bigots are being used, masterfully, to win elections and then their issues are ignored. As soon as they take office they turn their attention back to very important issues like tax breaks for the children of rich people.
Mona
This isn’t Greece and it’s not “Xmas” and it’s not “Xian”If you didn’t know before, you do now.
RW, X has been used for centuries, I mean a LOOOONG time, by Xians, including for shorthand in church and legal records. Greek was a commonly used language in the early church, and hence the Greek letter Chi, or X, was co-opted by both the Greek and Western Xian churches. If I wanted to take time, I could find you, say, 17th century British lists of convicted and pardoned felons, whose names were shortened to “Xpian” when the felon was named Chrispian, or “Xper” when the criminal was Christopher. Western, non-Greek medieval legal and church documents are full of that, as well as references to Christ as “Xt.”
Feel free to check out these posts, one at LGF and another at Fodor’s travel forum, that show this has nothing to do with being in Greece, but with proper and respectful use of X.
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=10752#c0182
http://www.fodors.com/forums/threadselect.jsp?fid=2&tid=34536016
As to Mae Magourik’s grandson, I know nothing about him, unless you are confusing him with the nephew, Ken Mullinax. What I do know is that the grandson and/or Ken could have marched right back into court if Beth Gaddy was doing anything untoward, and they did not do so.
Why do you suppose that was the case, that instead Ken contacted the militants who took over for the Schindlers in the Schiavo circus and he thereby created a second, if lesser, frenzy?
Kimmitt
More likely, they get it from kos, Drum, Kleiman and atrios, much like some ill-informed commenters we all know so well.
Yeah, because we know how many stories are successfully broken by lefty blogs as versus righty blogs.
RW
Mona,
I’m reminded of someone from Vermont (97% whitey) doing an internet search for inner-city southern blacks. Take it easy, I’m one of those Christians and I’m pretty sure that I know more about myself and my religion than someone whose course work is done via google.
Well, there was that confederate wreath story, the immediate defense of the false CBS memo story, the continued “false but accurate” AWOL stuff. I must give kos credit for breaking the huge hatred story, repleat with the “screw them” entry. That one was gold.
I’m sure they enjoyed reading Powerline’s blog of the year story in Time, though.
On your side, you guys sure do get in plenty of licks pertaining to Jeff Gannon’s cock!
RW
I cannot read someone else’s mind, Mona. I don’t know the fellow nor do I know anyone involved, so all I could put forth would be speculation and rumor…..and you don’t want that, do you?
[that was meant in a comical fasion, trying to lighten up the mood]
John Cole
On your side, you guys sure do get in plenty of licks pertaining to Jeff Gannon’s cock!
Damnit, Ricky. I didn’t need that.
JAC
At any rate, where is this self-correcting blogosphere?
If history is any guide, I wouldn’t hold your breath. Heck I’m still waiting for my brother-in-law to resolve his cognitive dissonance in a healthy manner (i.e., non-delusional). Hasn’t happened yet.
He is still insisting that Saddam was deeply involved with 9/11 and there were WMDs in Iraq but this information can’t be made public because of “political reasons.” I kid you not. And he is no dummy. He graduated from Brown University for crips sake.
RW
Thought you’d like that one, John. :)
anthony
If he’s serious, THAT’s a bonehead move.
Heh … you really believed that the Corner and David Brooks are trying to give democrats good advice? My tip to you on understanding GOP advice to Dems … when the GOP offer Dems free advice assume the best Democrats strategy is to do the opposite.
W.B. Reeves
Lets see, RW falsly claims that Mona was tarring all Christians with the same brush. Mona responds, pointing out that she did no such thing. RW attacks her for using the term Xtian, claiming that it somehow taint’s her views, presumably because it indicates a hostility towards Christians. Mona points out that the term is perfectly respectable and has, in fact, been used by Christians throughout history up to the present day. RW counters by essentially saying: “Taint the way we do things round here!” Result: RW skates away from his original falsehood, no doubt thinking himself a very clever fellow.
This is about as subtle as cow pasture full of guys wearing hoods.
C&L
There’s this video of Michelle Malkin trying to turn the refuted report into some sort of truth while subbing for Hannity.
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2005/04/16.html#a2492
andrea
Christians who get offended by putting an X in X-mas are usually the same ones who think that the King James Bible is “The Bible.”
Christians who’ve actually studied the religion that they practice know better.
(BTW, I think that the King James Bible is arguably one of the most beautifully written versions of the bible. But it is, at best, a flawed translation of the original texts.)
RW
What, no fascist references or claims that I beat my kids?
Yeah, and they “usually” are the kind to make wild generalizations based on their own anecdotal evidence, the bigots.
Kimmitt
On your side, you guys sure do get in plenty of licks pertaining to Jeff Gannon’s cock!
Dude . . . that’s his head.
What, no fascist references or claims that I beat my kids?
Hey, most fascists are perfectly nice to their kids. Stop being down on fascists, man.
The Disenfranchised Voter
[quote]Putting an “X” in place of the name of the risen savior says it all, Mona.”[/quote]
Wow, just wow. What a ridiculous statement. RW, if you needed any evidence that you are one of the Christian wackos we are discussing, you just got it right there.
RW
I guess you missed the part where I followed it up by giving Mona the nod on that, DV. Since you may have accidentally skipped over it, I won’t slam you but will rather suggest that you scroll up and witness. I even further extended an olive branch by introducing some comedy and made sure that everyone knew that I was trying to lighten the atmosphere.
[groan]
Hmmmm. I guess you neglected to read the part where I stated that the folks intervening in the Schiavo case were el wrongo (I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt, again, because that would mean that you’d have to scroll all the way to the top and that’s far too much to ask for those oozing internet bravado, but it *was* the first comment). Reading’s not a strong point, huh?
That said, the person who called me a “liberal Christian” because of this would probably disagree with your assessment (and doesn’t one generally have to be a pro-lifer as a prerequisite for that sort of stuff?), but hey, whatever makes you sleep better.
Hope you don’t mind but I simply MUST use that quote as part of my ‘endorsements’ section. I get some doozies thrown in my direction but that one’s a keeper.
J. Caesar
RW – I just want to point out, that as a Christian… you don’t speak for me, so please shut up.
John Cole
LEt’s tone down the hostility just a notch, here.
ketel
Although it’s drifted off topic, this is an interesting back and forth here. RW, Mona’s coursework wasn’t done through google, she was just making it ever so easy for you to research and retract your knee-jerk, overly defensive comment. And that was kind of a backhanded ‘nod’ you gave…
Anyway, this points to a major problem I have with emphatic religiosity – people who don’t really know what they’re talking about. Now, I’m all for each and every person having their own personal version of whatever religion they choose, but there’s little more annoying than people who think the religion is “theirs” and that they have an exclusive right to tell you the rules and regulations even if they’ve invested much less time studying it themselves. But that’s the whole problem, right? Religion is pure faith and while there are rulebooks, people tend to put themselves in the role of arbiter and judge of what the rules really mean, regardless of what history or truth they betray.
RW seems thoughtful and intelligent, yet it’s attitudes like his (and there are many, many less thoughtful out there) that first opened my eyes to the possiblity that maybe religion wasn’t for me. Though I’ve moved away from it, I was a Xian for 20 years and in my desire to truly understand what the single most important driving force in my life was about, have read the Bible 3 times and have studied many different translations. It’s ironic that doing the research to reinforce my beliefs is what finally undid my belief. And I’m not saying that others would follow the same path. It just bothers me to hear people say I (or anyone who doesn’t agree with them) “don’t get it”. I actually do get it and just didn’t like what I got.
Amazed
Mae Magourik: Where to begin. Lets see. Heres a woman with a dissected aorta in her 80’s- other than that no substantial medical background is provided other than “she is being starved and dehydrated”.
The ignorant mass of activists rushes in and does not insist on further information from the family spokesman- its apparently enough that this non medical professional asserts that his mother has the same thing and it was “treated successfully”.
Heres a thought or two for the non medical “rescue” activist that wants IV fluids and feeding tubes “because its the least we could do”: Homeostasis.
Kidney function: Know what happens when you overload fluids and the person cannot eliminate them? They build up in the tissues. Edema. Ankles the size of grape fruits. Blood pressure increases. Fluids filling the lungs and causing congestive heart failure. Increase in the size of that aortic dissection.
What about her cardiac performance? At eighty her heart might not be what it was when she was 40 or even 60. History of high blood pressure? History of clots?
Feeding tubes introduce fluids also. Otherwise you couldn’t move the stuff through the tube. If fluid loading is an issue the doctor is faced with choosing one, both or neither as treatment options (IV Fluids, feeding tube, both or neither)
Obviously her doctors know her history. They have her test results. Her doctor would have to walk a fine line in creating balance and acting in her best interest, medically speaking.
On the other hand maybe the rescue activists are right- the only reason these medical treatments (IV fluids and feeding tubes) are witheld is because of someones death agenda.
Amazed
Whats my point? Picture this: A doctor, a priest and a police officer are riding together in a car. They come upon an accident scene. They each have their own role to play. These roles should be respected and no one role should be blind to another.
scs2005
John Cole, sorry still no apologies here. I think one of the things that gets me angry about the Terri case is that so many intelligent people are using “authority think” a little too often. How about using our own (hopefully) fully functionaing brains for a change?
For instance, so many say there was “clear and convincing” evidence that it was Terri’s wish that she wanted to die. How do they know this? Because the “courts” determined it to be so. There is now, they say, clear and convincing evidence that Terri was not strangled and abused because the DFCS “determinined” it.
I don’t know whether the girl was abused or not. I imagine that some, maybe most, of the allegations were bogus from kooks calling in from things they heard in the media. But I am smart enough to know that just because the DFCS doesn’t say it, doesn’t mean it isn’t so.
For instance, can the Florida agency really determine if she had been smothered all those years ago, or if the needle holes in her body had injected her with quickly disappearing insulin, or if her broken bones on her bone scan were the result of abuse, or if the negative statements Michael alledgedly had made about Terri in front of some nurses really occurred? They would need more than just investigative powers for that, they would need a crystal ball.
I think its funny that (mostly) liberal anti-death penalties types are now putting so much stock in the ivestigative powers and wisdom of the authorities that be when they are the last ones to trust the validity of the pocesses that are behind the death row inmates becoming death row inmantes.
So even though the DFCS says one thing, I will perhaps take that vaunted Florida agency’s conclusions with a little bit of salt until I hear more facts about what and when and how all was investigated. And, for now, like a jury member, I will piece together my knowledge of the facts with a little trust in my own instincts to come up with my own judgements about what I believe.
Amazed
scs2005 wrote:
“For instance, can the Florida agency really determine if she had been smothered all those years ago, or if the needle holes in her body had injected her with quickly disappearing insulin, or if her broken bones on her bone scan were the result of abuse, or if the negative statements Michael alledgedly had made about Terri in front of some nurses really occurred? They would need more than just investigative powers for that, they would need a crystal ball.”
In answer to your question the DFCS did not make its determinations in a vacuum. Its determinations were made after reviewing the medical records. Its determinations were made after interviewing witnesses. Its determinations were made based upon fact finding. Its determinations were made after consulting with reliable experts in various fields. Its investigations were conducted by persons with specific education, training and experience with abuse cases.
No- they did not have or use a crystal ball. I think they left that kind of thing to the conspiracy theorists.
If you want to do your own research on the DFCS findings you can find what they released here:
http://www.dcf.state.fl.us/news/schiavo1.pdf
http://www.dcf.state.fl.us/news/schiavo2.pdf
http://www.dcf.state.fl.us/news/schiavo3.pdf
For an interesting analysis that is definately NOT NON POINT OF VIEW (NPOV would be unbiased, this analysis of the DFCS findings has a definate slant):
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2005/apr2005/schi-a20.shtml