Tuesday, October 30, 2007

Profane Justice

This book, written by one of the premier activists for children and families, and against the "child protectors," who do more damage to, and abuse more children by ripping them from the loving arms of their parents, to put them "in the system" where they are twice as apt to be abused or sexually abused than they ever would be at home (by their own figures) is a "must read" for anyone who has children because every one of you are targets for the "child protectors," who have no concept of law. They "define" for themselves just what the "law" is with regard to child abuse and take the child as a first option, not the last. Then they take you into their "captive courts" which allows their opinions to be regarded as fact. If they target you, you can count on a multi-year fight that costs you a lot of money, even if you win, as we did. Then they bill you for some amazing amount of money for "the cost of child care" while they were "in the system." This ignores the fact that they get paid by the feds at every juncture. They get paid for every child "in the system," no matter how short a time. If they manage to wrest parental control from the parents and successfully put the child up for adoption they get paid $4,500. If the child is a "special needs" child (and what child isn't "special needs" after being "in the system" for a while?) they get $6,500. And to create a "special needs" child, all they have to do is check the appropriate box on a federal form. This book gives you many tips on how to rebuff them and beat the efforts of the "child protectors" to take your children and criminalize you while making a profit. (Easy Book Search,)

Saturday, October 27, 2007

Child Sex Abuse in Foster Care

It's a proven fact that children in foster care are TWICE as apt to be abused and/or sexually abused in foster care than they ever were at home with their parents, who usually love them and want to protect them. There is a firm of lawyers now who are DEDICATED to this, who tell us, "The number of children in foster care who are the victims of sexual abuse is alarming. In our experience advocating for children in foster care since 1984, we have found that the overwhelming majority of staff responsible for children in foster care do not have the information, skills or training necessary to respond to the needs of sexually abused and abusing children. As a result, agencies are often not able to provide proper intervention for these children. In fact, agency clinicians repeatedly ask Lawyers For Children to provide them with treatment information and resources. Once in foster care, sexually abused children are particularly vulnerable to repeated incidents of abuse. Many factors within the foster care system contribute to their increased risk, such as multiple transfers, rapid staff turnover, and lack of appropriate treatment and clinical services." We're putting this link on our "Child Protector Watch" site. (Lawyers for Children,)

Thursday, October 25, 2007

Child Protection -- Double Shakedown:

When the "child protectors" come after you, you're gonna pay -- whether you're guilty or not. You'll either pay a portion (in taxes) of the many different "fees" they get from the feds at every juncture (they get a set fee for every day a child is "in the system," no matter how long), or they'll bill you some astronomical amount for "The cost of child protection," even though those costs have been more than amply paid by the feds. And if they can successfully terminate your parental rights and put the children up for adoption, they get from $4,500 to $6,000 PER CHILD ($6,000 for "special needs" children (ALL children are "special needs after being "in the system" a while). My son WON his fight with them (with the help of my prior experience when they stole my two boys without being able to prove abuse on either my wife or me) but he was still billed several THOUSAND dollars for "the cost of child protection," and he paid, against my advice, to end it. Now they have him marked "hands off" because he cost them $50,000 MORE than they got from the feds (or the "extortion" they perpetrated on him later). (Freedom Magazine,)

Wednesday, October 17, 2007

Another Child Murdered in Foster Care

Chandler Graftner was intentionally starved to death by his foster father. He was awarded custody only because of his contribution to Chandler's brother's conception a long time ago. I say he and his live-in girlfriend INTENTIONALLY starved him to death because he could not have starved to death accidentally in the four months between the child protectors' last visit (at which they declared him "healthy") and his death of malnutrition (unless the child protectors hid his condition, which is possible). He had been confined to a closet and not fed for a LONG time. God knows, there were enough "signals," including one from a school nurse that was also dismissed) even if you don't include his cryptic plea to his grandmother that his foster father was going to "hurt me,' A claim the child protectors dismissed out of hand, as they always do with FOSTER PARENTS. Foster parents, being "part of the system," are usually not suspected of child abuse, even though the child abus . . .er, uh, protectors' own figures prove that more children are abused and killed in FOSTER care than ever at home. Predictably, the "child protectors" hide behind the "confidentiality" law so they won't have to answer questions. I would think the "confidentiality" would end when they kill the child. As is usual, there will be an "investigation," at which they will whine about "not enough money" and "not enough people" to do the job right. Then they will get a bigger budget (using incompetence as a fund-raiser as usual), this death (as with all the others) will be "swept under the rug," they'll get a bigger budget, one or two lower level employees will be fired or transferred, and life will go on, business as usual, for everybody except Chandler. That's the way it always is, including the year I was on the Governor's Committee on Child Abuse and was "frozen out" when I submitted a report on how to improve it for real. After that, I couldn't get a straight answer as to where and when the next meeting was to be held. Later that year the committee published its findings. The child protectors got a bigger budget, a couple of lower level people "had to go" and things went on, business as usual. They depend on the gullibility and short memory of politicians. The child protectors are so well entrenched, and have everybody so well conditioned, they can do this. (Source: Rocky Mountain News, 5/12/07)

Sunday, October 14, 2007

Janet Reno: Chief Among Illicit Prosecutions

Former attorney General Janet Reno continues to run her mouth for money, all over the country, instead of being imprisoned for prosecutorial misconduct in at least one case we can prove: "Charged by Reno's office in 1984 with child molestation, Grant Snowden was convicted on the manufactured testimony of one such child, who was 4 years old when the abuse allegedly occurred. Snowden, the most decorated police officer in the history of the South Miami Police Department, was sentenced to five life terms -- and was imprisoned with people he had put there. Snowden served 11 years before his conviction was finally overturned by a federal court in an opinion that ridiculed the evidence against him and called his trial 'fundamentally unfair.' [typical of most "child protector" trials -RT] In a massive criminal justice system, mistakes will be made from time to time. But Janet Reno put people like Snowden in prison not only for crimes that they didn't commit -- but also for crimes that never happened. Such was the soccer-mom-induced hysteria of the '80s, when innocent people were prosecuted for fantastical crimes concocted in therapists' offices." The "child protector" system is out of control, fueled by "bonuses" paid by the federal government at every juncture. These agencies are paid for every day a child is "in custody," even if no charges are ever able to be brought against the "target" (which is unusual, the way they manufacture them). (Source: Ann Coulter, 8/29/07)