Madonna Steals Two More African Children From Malawi

[Autumnlicious]

Because people in more affluent countries can share in their quality of life with children in dire need of a family?

And it is more likely those affluent countries are Western with enough wealth that well-meaning celebrities can navigate the international adoption system and adopt.

[Iroscato]

You're right, Madonna's actions do very little to address the core problem.

Here's a fucking revolutionary idea - why don't you put aside the rich white woman legally adopting kids and focus on, you know, the core problem itself?

[Edwardo Piet]

But Iro that makes no sense!

Because EVERYONE knows that the core of the problem is legal adoption not illegal kidnapping! Stop putting the cart before the horse, man!

[Aroura]

p.s., usually people WANT evidence, links, credentialed quotes.

---

Ok, I know there is quite a lot of kidnapping going on, but Madonna isn't the one kidnapping kids, and may not even be aware of it.

Right, so my understanding is that Christian groups and dishonorable money grubbers go to poor countries, start orphanages, then take in actual orphans and ALSO hire people to outright steal children, or coerce poor families into giving them up.  The adopting parents are not aware of this when they adopt.  They are just people looking to adopt an orphan, for whatever reason.  If they give the child love and a good upbringing, who cares for the personal motives?  

There are still actual orphans involved.  At this point, does anyone have information that the specific children Madonna adopted were of the kidnapped or coerced variety, and not of the actual orphan variety? Or are people just up in arms because a middle aged, unmarried, female celebrity is adopting more kids and we like to shit on celebrity motives for this?

The adoption agencies, most of them, do know that adoptable children are often acquired by nefarious means.  But they turn a blind eye.  Why?  $$$.  It's capitalism, imperialism, it's a profit thing.  Profits over people is the modus operandi, and there is big $ to be made stealing and selling other people's children.

But the main sub theme of this thread asks the why of it.  Why are there forlorn, orphaned, 3rd World poor children all over the planet?  I have answered that question brielfy--with graphics--but I can go on answering it if by popular demand.  Madonna, of course, never addresses that question, she's is probably incapable of even asking it.

---

I'll ask again.  Why aren't Africans adopting stolen, white American children?

---

Child laundering is a scheme whereby intercountry adoptions are effected by illegal and fraudulent means. It may involve the , the acquisition of children through monetary arrangements, deceit and/or force. The children may then be held in sham orphanages while formal international adoption processes are used to send the children to adoptive parents in another country.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_laundering

Right, I acknowledged that the adoption agencies often know.  
You are accusing the adoptive parent(s) of the crime, though.  That is what everyone in this thread is calling you out on.

No one is disagreeing that child trafficking of any kind is terrible.  You are repeatedly setting up a strawman and knocking it down.  Change the title of the thread, and discuss the actual issues (stop dragging Madonna and other celeb parents into it), and you'll probably get a much better discussion.

[Fred Hampton]

Because people in more affluent countries can share in their quality of life with children in dire need of a family?

And it is more likely those affluent countries are Western with enough wealth that well-meaning celebrities can navigate the international adoption system and adopt.

Why are 1st World countries more affluent?  Is there any material connection between 1st World affluence and 3rd World poverty?  I cover those questions briefly in post #5. Also, to give you an assist here, slaves don't usually adopt their slave masters. I can't think of any examples.

(hint:  slaves)

---

p.s., usually people WANT evidence, links, credentialed quotes.

---

The adoption agencies, most of them, do know that adoptable children are often acquired by nefarious means.  But they turn a blind eye.  Why?  $$$.  It's capitalism, imperialism, it's a profit thing.  Profits over people is the modus operandi, and there is big $ to be made stealing and selling other people's children.

But the main sub theme of this thread asks the why of it.  Why are there forlorn, orphaned, 3rd World poor children all over the planet?  I have answered that question brielfy--with graphics--but I can go on answering it if by popular demand.  Madonna, of course, never addresses that question, she's is probably incapable of even asking it.

---

I'll ask again.  Why aren't Africans adopting stolen, white American children?

---

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_laundering

Right, I acknowledged that the adoption agencies often know.  
You are accusing the adoptive parent(s) of the crime, though.  That is what everyone in this thread is calling you out on.

No one is disagreeing that child trafficking of any kind is terrible.  You are repeatedly setting up a strawman and knocking it down.  Change the title of the thread, and discuss the actual issues (stop dragging Madonna and other celeb parents into it), and you'll probably get a much better discussion.

Well, if adoptive parents are that stupid not to know and do even a simple Google search on the subject, I suggest they crawl out from whatever rock they've been living under.  And when somebody charges you $30k+ for a child from Africa, don't just a few red flags come up in a would-be adopters mind?

No, what's going on here, is that most posters are coming to Madonna's, et al, defense no matter what factual information is put in their faces.  And there're very good concrete reasons for that. And they also consistently fail to comprehend and or care about the bigger socioeconomic dynamic behind it all: the WHY?

I put up no straw man, so dont even go there, unless you learn the definition of it.

---

You're right, Madonna's actions do very little to address the core problem.

Here's a fucking revolutionary idea - why don't you put aside the rich white woman legally adopting kids and focus on, you know, the core problem itself?

The demand fuels the supply, right?  yeah, right.

[Aroura]

Because people in more affluent countries can share in their quality of life with children in dire need of a family?

And it is more likely those affluent countries are Western with enough wealth that well-meaning celebrities can navigate the international adoption system and adopt.

Why are 1st World countries more affluent?  Is there any material connection between 1st World affluence and 3rd World poverty?  I cover those questions briefly in post #5.

(hint:  slaves)

---

Right, I acknowledged that the adoption agencies often know.  
You are accusing the adoptive parent(s) of the crime, though.  That is what everyone in this thread is calling you out on.

No one is disagreeing that child trafficking of any kind is terrible.  You are repeatedly setting up a strawman and knocking it down.  Change the title of the thread, and discuss the actual issues (stop dragging Madonna and other celeb parents into it), and you'll probably get a much better discussion.

Well, if adoptive parents are that stupid not to know and do even a simple Google search on the subject, I suggest they crawl out from whatever rock they've been living under.  And when somebody charges you $30k+ for a child from Africa, don't just a few red flags come up in a would-be adopters mind?

No, what's going on here, is that most posters are coming to Madonna's, et al, defense no matter what factual information is put in their faces.  And there're very good concrete reasons for that.

I put up no straw man, so dont even go there, unless you learn the definition of it.

Ignorance itself is not a crime.

However, I see you have no interest in acknowledging your mistakes.  You are right and everyone else is wrong. Good luck persuading anyone of anything with that mindset.  

Carry on.

[brewer]

OMG, just looked and Jolie adopted from Cambodia and Vietnam also. It's not just an African conspiracy but world wide. But then I heard Angelina is not good at math so that may help explain things. 

And holy shit, AJ and BP sold pictures of their first biologic and donated the 7.6 million in proceeds to UNICEF. It's a fucking racket. God damn capitalists!

[Fred Hampton]

And this reminds me, if Madonna is so found of black orphan children, aren't there plenty to choose from in London?  Would save her the trip.  Well, she would have to get off her butt and take a limo ride downtown to see some...

---

---

---

Why are 1st World countries more affluent?  Is there any material connection between 1st World affluence and 3rd World poverty?  I cover those questions briefly in post #5.

(hint:  slaves)

---

Well, if adoptive parents are that stupid not to know and do even a simple Google search on the subject, I suggest they crawl out from whatever rock they've been living under.  And when somebody charges you $30k+ for a child from Africa, don't just a few red flags come up in a would-be adopters mind?

No, what's going on here, is that most posters are coming to Madonna's, et al, defense no matter what factual information is put in their faces.  And there're very good concrete reasons for that.

I put up no straw man, so dont even go there, unless you learn the definition of it.

Ignorance itself is not a crime.

However, I see you have no interest in acknowledging your mistakes.  You are right and everyone else is wrong. Good luck persuading anyone of anything with that mindset.  

Carry on.

I'm sorry, maybe I missed which point(s) of yours you were making that you feel are right.  ??

[Edwardo Piet]

@ Fred

Stop being a dense obnoxious moron and recognize that this makes sense:

No one is disagreeing that child trafficking of any kind is terrible.  You are repeatedly setting up a strawman and knocking it down.  Change the title of the thread, and discuss the actual issues (stop dragging Madonna and other celeb parents into it), and you'll probably get a much better discussion.

---

And this reminds me, if Madonna is so found of black orphan children, aren't there plenty to choose from in London?  Would save her the trip.  Well, she would have to get off her butt and take a limo ride downtown to see some...

You clearly don't give two fucks about actual child trafficking and are only interested in slamming Madonna.

[Fred Hampton]

Madonna, don't you just love that "material girl".  Oh, and she is, she is so material, that girl!

Madonna Wears $10 Million Worth of Diamonds in Rebel Heart Tour Video...

http://people.com/style/madonna-wears-10...neil-lane/

Maybe on her next theft of someone else's African child, the very least she could do is pay homage to Sierra Leone(NOTE:  GRAPHIC IMAGE):

---

---

---

This young child's hands have been amputated as a result of the crimes caused by diamond mining in Sierra Leone.

---

https://www.pinterest.com/pin/462463455455238595/

---

@ Fred

Stop being a dense obnoxious moron and recognize that this makes sense:

---

No one is disagreeing that child trafficking of any kind is terrible.  You are repeatedly setting up a strawman and knocking it down.  Change the title of the thread, and discuss the actual issues (stop dragging Madonna and other celeb parents into it), and you'll probably get a much better discussion.

---

And this reminds me, if Madonna is so found of black orphan children, aren't there plenty to choose from in London?  Would save her the trip.  Well, she would have to get off her butt and take a limo ride downtown to see some...

---

You clearly don't give two fucks about actual child trafficking and are only interested in slamming Madonna.

Really, did you start this thread, Pinky?