Saturday, October 2, 2010

Liars! Who Knew?

For anyone who thinks that the Brown "family" was shocked by the launch of a bigamy investigation, as you can see here, they have yanked your chain. One year ago, Christine Brown revealed her political agenda and it did indeed include putting her "family" at risk for prosecution.

Way to go main stream media. Let's not even bother with some simple due diligence. I notice that even Ben Winslow failed to point this out, and it was his story.

9/28/2010 8:52 AM PDT by TMZ Staff
"TMZ just received a statement from the Brown family -- saying, "We are disappointed in the announcement of an investigation, but when we decided to do this show, we knew there would be risks."


Ben Winslow FOX 13 News Reporter 9:39 PM MDT, September 27, 2009,0,919279.story

"Because of that, we're stuck," said Brown.

"So you want to be charged, in a way?" she was asked by Fox 13's Ben Winslow.

"Bring it on," Brown replied. "Kind of. We need a test case. We need it decriminalized. People need to see that there are families out there that would be a good representation of the plural communities and we just live our lives like everybody else and that's the only law we break."


  1. Not sure what to think about this. It seems like they are trying to give the impression that there is a wind of change blowing through their communities , no more child brides ? only
    consenting adults ? In a bid for their lifestyles to be legitamised. Not sure what's really going on here.
    There are still women and children suffering in these communities and they cannot airbrush away that reality with a cynical public relations exercise of a television show. And while that's still the case you keep up the good work you Texan tiger you , of exposing their lies and holding them accountable.

  2. Hi Steve,

    Yes, they are members of the Apostolic United Brethren, or AUB. They are much more "modern" in their lifestyles. There are thousands of them, and polygamy is about as normal in their part of the country as being a football, soccer or hockey mom here.

    In other words, they are simply a different branch of fundamentalist Mormons.

    In the first write up, of the first episode, the journalist responsible for the story, wrote that they were, Fundamentalist Latter Day Saints or FLDS.

    They are not. That was a blatant lie, probably intended to rook the American people into believing that there are more "normal" members of that group.

    I mean really, it's a reality show. It's the Learning Channel. How dumb would you have to be to write in your basic reporting of the facts that your subjects were Pentecostal if they were in fact Catholic?

    I have more facts today about the Browns and how they came to be selected for this show.

    Everyone say hello to our old friends over at the Safety Net Committee in Utah.

    These guys should be in deep you-know-what, shortly.

  3. Hi K DEE.

    Yeah the way I see it is that they can fool some of the people some of the time but they can't fool our Texan Tiger. PERIOD !

  4. Fundamentalist Mormon is not the same as "FLDS". Some writers have confused those two terms (like John Krakauer did in his book) by thinking they are one and the same where they are not. Many confuse FLDS with LDS too when reporting about Mormons in general so it is not surprising. The Browns have stated that they are Fundamentalist Mormons, so I don't see where they are lying.

  5. Only the first women in the Kody Bunch is a wife. The remaining three women are concubines in Kody's harem, and as such have placed themselves in a position where they and their children face poverty. They are not entitled to share in his health insurance, dental insurance, life insurance, tax benefits or pension benefits. God help them if they are their kids get seriously ill. Moreover, they only each get 25% of Kody the Copulator, while he gets 100% of each woman. Is that equality? Why these women rush towards their own impoverishment and degradation beats me. Polygamy was sanctioned in the Old Testament, which is a Jewish book, not a Christian book, and is condemned in the New Testament. In 1st Timothy, Chap 3, v. 1-2, St. Paul says a man must have"but one wife." So when they say they are following their Christian religion they're either lying or they've never read the New Testament. They say they can help one another with the housework and with baby-sitting ....does that mean that clever little Kody never has to wash a dish or change a diaper? This self-centred, pathetic man is using them as his sexual collectibles and servants. Wake up, ladies, and smell the coffee!

  6. Thanks for the comments, Janice, yes, they are indeed just as you described. They are concubines. They have none of the legal rights or protections afforded to a wife.

    Of course, if they manage to get polygamy decriminalized, soon they will be wanting their rights to go along with it. So when Kody dies, we'll be sending out 4 social security checks every month instead of just the one. And by golly they better be full payments, too. Anything else would amount to discrimination against their lifestyle, right?

  7. It was great that Jancis pointed out that the New Testament does speak out against any kind of polygamy. I have read otherwise elsewhere.

    There needs to be a higher level of understanding of what will happen to our social security system if polygamy, including the polyamory type, becomes legal in Canada. Thanks for spreading the word on that aspect Jancis and "Boots".

    The polyamorists are sure to increase the HIV/AIDS numbers in the heterosexual population with their liberation copulation!