Wednesday, October 14, 2009
"Troublemakers"
A six-year-old child who brought his cub scout eating utensil to school to use in eating was suspended, and sent to a special class for “troublemakers.” Seems to me the people who ARE the “troublemakers” in this plot are the “school officials” who aren’t intelligent enough to realize such a utensil in the hands of a six-year-old is NOT a “dangerous weapon. Looks like “cooler heads” have prevailed, because they have “backtracked” on insisting he be put in “reform school” and have allowed him to return to school. I just wonder what the hell is WRONG with these “officials! (One News Now video)
Sunday, October 11, 2009
Children Killed in Foster Care
These are the worst cases imaginable. Children taken from their parents because the “child protectors” say they will be abused, and are killed. The “child protectors CLAIM to “protect the children but, more often than not, the children are not “abused” by their parents, but are KILLED by “the system. If they’re not killed by” the system, they are ruined for life by it. The “systemic problem here is “the system” taking the child as a FIRST OPTION, and often (a MAJORITY of the time) finding NO abuse on the part of the parents, and getting the child KILLED by “the system. Studies have shown that THERE IS NO abuse in 80% of all cases. Which means “child protectors” are so busy pursuing false abuse cases, they don’t have time to find REAL cases of child abuse, either at home, or especially not in foster homes. They are “hard-wired” to suspect abuse at home, but not in foster homes.
So they miss much and torpedo their efforts to find REAL child abuse. If they’d just RECOGNIZE it when no abuse is found, rather than pursuing ALL cases as if the “report” itself was “prima-facie evidence” of abuse, they might actually uncover REAL cases. The “child protectors” say I’m “against child protection.” I’m not. I AM against child ABUSE in the GUISE of child protection. I am against the oppressive means they use to harass innocent parents unconstitutionally. Against child protection? No. Accusing me of being against child protection is their means of discrediting the truth I tell about them and their scams. But the numbers speak for themselves. (Physical abuse in foster care, 160 to 59 at home). That’s THREE TIMES the abuse children suffer at home! Sexual abuse? 112 in foster care to 12 at home. You cannot argue against these numbers, and they come from The National Center on child Abuse and Neglect (NCCAN). These aren’t coming from me. I’m just passing them along. (SUNCANAA)
So they miss much and torpedo their efforts to find REAL child abuse. If they’d just RECOGNIZE it when no abuse is found, rather than pursuing ALL cases as if the “report” itself was “prima-facie evidence” of abuse, they might actually uncover REAL cases. The “child protectors” say I’m “against child protection.” I’m not. I AM against child ABUSE in the GUISE of child protection. I am against the oppressive means they use to harass innocent parents unconstitutionally. Against child protection? No. Accusing me of being against child protection is their means of discrediting the truth I tell about them and their scams. But the numbers speak for themselves. (Physical abuse in foster care, 160 to 59 at home). That’s THREE TIMES the abuse children suffer at home! Sexual abuse? 112 in foster care to 12 at home. You cannot argue against these numbers, and they come from The National Center on child Abuse and Neglect (NCCAN). These aren’t coming from me. I’m just passing them along. (SUNCANAA)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)