Child Protector Racket

SWAT "Takes Down" Mom

2011-04-16T12:03:00.000-07:00

For refusing to give her daughter anti-psychotic drugs which she refused to do because they made the girl sick. Apparently the “medical police” (and the CPS) think a doctor’s prescription is tantamount to an order from a judge. That individuals no longer have the right to refuse medication. When she refused to allow CPS to kidnap her daughter, they called in SWAT, who broke down her door without a warrant of any kind, using masked men bristling with guns. They say she “opened fire” on them, which is her right when masked, armed men break down her door. After a long standoff, they finally arrested her and took her daughter, and the girl is now being molested in the care of CPS. The mother now faces many felony charges for firing back at the cops. Apparently it’s illegal to defend yourself when the assaulters are cops. Whether or not they are legally breaking in. She's lucky the cops were lousy shots. She could have been dead. You should know that CPS lied about the father’s ability to care for the daughter as a ploy to gain the cooperation of the cops. This is what it’s coming to now, folks. You won’t read about this in the liberal press. They like to keep such stories as “one-off” local stories to keep the world from realizing what they do. (Natural News)

Child Protectors Just "Snatch" Children

2011-02-04T13:01:00.000-08:00

They SAY there is “evidence” of “psychological issues” they can’t detail or describe. But that didn’t stop them from just TAKING the children because they are being “home schooled." Authorities even fined the parents $5,000 for home schooling them in the past. Of course, this happened in Sweden where the laws are different. But evidence shows that our own “child protectors” operate the same way and are ALLOWED to do so. And have done so many times in the past. They CLAIM their activities are “civil,” not criminal, and thus constitutional protections don’t apply.

But that’s just a dodge that allows them to operate “extra-constitutionally” in their efforts to collect the myriad “fees” the feds give them at every point in “the process,” from the FIRST DAY after they “snatch” a child until they are either returned to their parents or adopted out. They have a very definite conflict of interest here, in that they PROFIT ($4.500 to $6,000 each) from severing parental rights and manage to adopt the children out. Meanwhile they get “fees” for every day those children are “in the system.” It is to their monetary advantage to delay the return of the children as long as they can.They collect a fee if the child is "in the system" ONE DAY. It's a simple moneymaking scam.

With my own children more than 35 years ago, they stalled and stalled, lying (having NOTHING for which to keep them) about the dates of hearings, and finally succeeding in severing my parental rights by doing so. I was never charged with ANYTHING, but they kept the kids anyway, collecting I don’t know how much in “interim fees” and the final $12,000 [$6,000 each] they collected for adopting them out (I have not seen, nor heard from or about them since. I don’t know if they’re alive or dead. CPS wouldn’t tell me, anyway). $12, 000 because they were “declared” special needs kids—which is not unusual after being removed from their loving home and being “passed around” among foster homes for years while being brainwashed by CPS about how lousy their parents are. What child would NOT be “special needs” child after that? (World Net Daily)

Why Do Child Protectors Kill So Many Kids?

2011-01-12T13:39:00.000-08:00

There is an entire web site devoted specifically to the deaths of CHILDREN while in the “care” of the “child protectors.” The numbers are a lot bigger than those of children who are killed by their own parents. This site not only notes their deaths, they show pictures of these (formerly) adorable children. What frightens me is that many of these children’s parents don’t even know their children are dead because “Children’s Services” don’t tell them. When they lied and conned me out of two of my children, they cut off ALL contact for me. They might as well have been DEAD. Maybe they ARE. I have neither seen, nor heard from them since the oldest was six. With NO charges against ME. (Suncanaa)

Who's Watching the "Child Protectors?"

2011-01-11T14:35:00.000-08:00

“A 36-year-old Quebec mother has an idea that has been kicked around in this column in the past. She believes child protectors have too much power to be without public overview, and a review board similar to those in police services is needed.” (Ottowa Citizen) She’s right. If what they did to me more than 30 years ago is any indication, she’s MORE than right. They took my two boys from my wife (while I was out of state), charging HER with “criminal child abuse.” They couldn’t prove it, and had NO charges, of any kind, against me. But they kept thwe kids, anyway. They used subterfuge and skullduggery to deny me custody of MY OWN children. Then they lied about the date of the hearing to sever my parental rights until one day I didn’t make it to one of the hearings, at which they severed my parental rights and put my boys up for adoption. This after postponing this meeting time after time when I DID show up This netted them $12,000.00 in federal fees for TWO adoptions. They are even more brazen now, and have even LESS “oversight.” (Equal Justice)

Merry Christmas Again!

2010-12-25T12:07:00.001-08:00

You can’t say it often enough. I said it the other day, and now I say it again. “The PC Police” can take it and stick it. This day is dedicated to the birth of Jesus Christ, whether or not you believe in him. It’s the religion of Christians, and reference to it should NEVER “offend” anyone. I am not offended by reference to the symbols of other religions, and I should not be. And members of other religions should not be “offended” by references to someone else’s. Especially Muslims, whose “Holy Book” tells them to KILL anybody who does not believe exactly the same way they do. Today’s Christianity does not, even if they can find an obscure passage in the Old Testament that might be read in such a way that some people might think it does. In any case, it is not a “guiding principle” to Christians. Some non-Christians seem to think they can stop Christians from making reference to their religion by wishing people “Merry Christmas” on this day. They’re wrong, even if some liberal courts disagree. They misread the Constitution to say that government and religion should be separate. That’s wrong. There is NOTHING in the Constitution saying that. So I say again, “Merry Christmas to all!” No matter what your religion. This will be the only post today, as I will be spending time with my family. (Just common sense)

Merry Christmas Everybody!

2010-12-22T12:26:00.000-08:00

Some people are “offended” by the words, “Merry Christmas." They can go to hell. I will not accede to the demands of the “PC Police” and say “Happy Holidays” instead of “Merry Christmas and Happy New Year.” Why should I care if atheists, some Jews, Islamics, and followers of other religions don’t like it when I wish them a Merry Christmas? This is a country FOUNDED by Christians and, in which most powerful posts are still held by people who at least SAY they’re Christians. If that offends some people, too bad! I don’t care. Most Jews don’t “get offended” by it, and they don’t try and kill Christianity in a Christian country. So I say, “Merry Christmas,” people, and anybody who gets “offended” by this can go to hell. (The Blaze)

Take Kids Because of "Oath Keepers"

2010-12-18T14:05:00.000-08:00

The “child protectors” have done it again! They’ve taken a man’s children because he was a member of the “Oath Keepers,” an organization that insists that government employees KEEP the oaths they took. What the hell is wrong with that:? The “child protectors” will use ANYTHING they can to support their unconstitutional and illegal “taking” of people’s children. They falsely told my own mother the wrong date for a hearing on taking my own children more than 30 years ago after I dutifully showed up at hearing after hearing, only to have it postponed. They had NOTHING they could show against me, but used the fact I didn’t show up for that last hearing as an excuse to take my two boys, anyway. I haven’t seen, nor spoken to them since, even though I was found guilty of NOTHING. They LIED, then took my children, for NO REASON. Is it any wonder I hate the very ground these evil people walk on? (Oath Keepers)

"Recovered Memories"

2010-10-28T13:14:00.000-07:00

This is one of the most pernicious scams ever to be perpetrated upon people, and it is perpetrated by the “child protectors.” Some “psychologists” put SUGGESTIONS into children’s heads that they have been abused and/or sexually abused by parents or friends of the family. Most of these “recovered memories” are false, or at least questionable and should not be seen in court as “testimony.” They should be treated as what they are: questionable, maybe SOLICITED “memories” that may or may not be true. But that’s not how they’re treated by the “child abusers—er, uh, protectors.” They are treated, in their “captive courts,” as “prima facie evidence” of abuse.. This should not be allowed. (Robert Shepherd)

Is "Oath Keepers" A Militia?

2010-10-12T12:27:00.000-07:00

Not at all. All they do is insist the people who are SUPPOSED to be protecting us KEEP the oath they took to uphold the Constitution of the United States. Nothing more. They SAY they have been known to buy deadly weapons, among them a rifle, handgun, and a taser. First of all, the purchase of a weapon is a right GUARANTEED by the Constitution; second, a “taser” is NOT a “deadly weapon. It is a Trade Mark of ONE company that makes and sells stun guns. This shows the sloppiness with which these people write their “legal documents.” Third, this is not the first time a child has been taken with spurious reasons that are “upheld” by the “captive courts” of the “child protectors.” It has happened many times, and will happen many times again. They will decide what organizations are “subversive” whether or not it is true. They will LABEL such organizations with spurious accusations and call them what they are NOT, such as “a militia.” (Oath Keepers)

Okay To Spank Kids?

2010-08-17T13:56:00.000-07:00

Yes. In spite of insidious propaganda like this, spanking your kids early in life is NECESSARY to convince them you WILL do it. I did it, and usually did not have to use corporal punishment on my kids later in life because they KNEW I’d do it. Today, kids who know their parents will not spank them run wild because they have been taught that all they have to do it threaten to “turn their parents in” to the “child protectors” if they feel (in their infinite wisdom) that they’re being abused. Today they teach parents NOT to spank them and when they (predictably) get in trouble, they want to blame the parents. I’m sure you’ve heard “authorities” talking about “punishing the parents” of obstreperous kids when it was “the authorities” who destroyed the parents’ ability to control them with their faulty teachings. (Soda Head)

Judge Dictates Religion

2010-01-08T12:08:00.000-08:00

“Do you think judges should have the power to decide what religion your children must belong to and which churches they may be prohibited from attending? We have long suspected that family courts are the most dictatorial and biased of all U.S. courts, routinely depriving divorced fathers of due process rights and authority over their own children, but this December a Chicago judge went beyond the pale. Cook County Circuit Judge Edward Jordan issued a restraining order to prohibit Joseph Reyes from taking his 3-year-old daughter to any non-Jewish religious activities because the ex-wife argued that would contribute to "the emotional detriment of the child." Mrs. Rebecca Reyes wants to raise her daughter in the Jewish religion, and the judge sided with the mother.” So what else is new? Judges making unconstitutional rulings, especially in “family court” is not new at all. They do it every day and defendants, who don’t have nearly as much money behind them as do the “family services,” can’t “make a Constitutional case out of it.” So they get away with it. What we need is a bunch of lawyers to take these cases on a “pro-bono” basis, so they can’t continue to get away with it. (Phyllis Schlafley) Thanks to Carl spitzer for bringing this to my attention.

Not Fit for Kennedy's Seat?

2010-01-01T13:18:00.000-08:00

What could make a person not fit to replace Teddy Kennedy? Who could do worse things than Teddy did in his lifetime? Maybe keeping a clearly innocent man in prison to advance her own career is one. What is there about this Senate seat that requires people of such low character to fill it? Massachusetts is famous for the villainous nature of its elected officials and its “witch hunts.” Mass. burned many innocent women many years ago, calling them “witches.” Later witch hunts involved imagined child sex abuse, which she gaily perpetrated. To be later named a Senator to replace one of the most villainous senators ever seems likely. (Ann Coulter)

Happy New Year!

2009-12-31T11:30:00.001-08:00

HAPPY NEW YEAR! Not “Happy Holidays” as the liberals prefer. I don’t follow their “political correctness” scam to limit what we can say in any way. I say “Merry Christmas” and “happy New Year”. This is the end of 2009. Hopefully, 2010 will be the year when we foil Obama’s plans by taking away his voting base in Congress. He currently has a voting majority there, and the Republicans can’t do much more than whine and gripe, and attempt filibuster of his idiot plans. This doesn’t work very well when he has the votes to invoke cloture. So when the election comes, vote AGAINST all Democrats and every Republican who is acting like a Democrat. Get those people OUT of there and, hopefully, Obama won’t be able to complete his planned takeover and collectivizing of this government. It’s up to you. Unless you vote them out, he will continue to destroy this country a little at a time, until we can elect Sarah Palin in 2012. (Just common sense)

Merry Christmas!

2009-12-25T14:36:00.001-08:00

I will not bow to the liberals’ political correctness dictate that I not mention “Christmas” in my greeting to you on Christmas day. The whole idea of eliminating the word “Christmas” from a greeting concerning the birth of Jesus Christ is stupid. But then, everything the liberals in Washington (and other government centers) do or say is stupid, so I expect it of them. Whatever your religion, using the name of Christ in a reference to His birthday is logical, and I am logical if nothing else. I respect ALL religions, even though I may not agree with all their tenets. So Merry Christmas to all, whatever your religion. I realize that may “offend” some, but that’s too bad. Trying to limit my free speech offends ME. (Just common sense)

"Troublemakers"

2009-10-14T12:31:00.000-07:00

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)

Children Killed in Foster Care

2009-10-11T16:44:00.000-07:00

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)

CPS Out of Control

2009-09-23T13:07:00.000-07:00

Wal-Mart employees reported what MIGHT have been child porn when they saw pictures of a naked child in a bathtub, taken by their parents while on vacation. They did it because they MIGHT have been included under the law that FORCES people who regularly come in contact with children to report ANY possibility of child abuse or be in trouble themselves (Under the Child Abuse & Neglect Reporting Act [fed. legislation passed in 1974]), Which is okay, if the “child protectors” didn’t take this and “run with it,” taking the children from their parents on the “off chance” the pictures, which were innocent pictures like most parents take of their kids, MIGHT be child sex abuse. It wasn’t. But the “child protectors, who have “dirty minds,” took the children anyway, and kept them for a month, collecting a “fee” from the feds for every day they were “in the system.” (Under the Child Abuse Prevention And Treatment Act of 1974 (CAPTA). When they finally came to their senses, they returned the kids (though they usually keep them and put them up for adoption, abuse or not, and collect $4,500 to $6,000), but probably charged the parents thousands of dollars for “the cost of foster care” which they neither wanted, nor asked for. That’s how CPS makes their money. I wish I could say this is an unusual occurrence. I can't. It is common. (Denver Examiner)

We Don't Always Lose

2009-08-20T12:27:00.000-07:00

One Father in Missouri that the Missouri VOCAL (Victims of Child Protection Laws) organization worked with finally got to see his son after SEVEN YEARS “in the system.” A baby sitter falsely accused this father of sexually abusing his then 4-year-old child. But the child (whose “coaching” apparently didn’t “take,”) said nothing of the sort ever happened. The charges were eventually dropped, but that meant nothing to the “child protectors,” who viewed him as guilty even though he was acquitted (they just couldn't prove it). CPS kept the son, and his behavior kept getting worse until he was finally imprisoned in “Boy’s Town,” where the father is now able to visit him. This resulted in the boy’s behavior improving. The “child protectors” did irreparable damage to this boy (and his father) but will never admit it, although they are now talking about letting him go home with his father. (This story came from VOCAL of Missouri)

Controlling Your Children

2009-08-18T15:08:00.000-07:00

Obama and other liberal socialists know they have to get to the children when they're too young to know better with their insidious message of socialism as an ideal. "Dirty secret No. 1 in Obamacare is about the government's coming into homes and usurping parental rights over child care and development. It's outlined in sections 440 and 1904 of the House bill (Page 838), under the heading 'home visitation programs for families with young children and families expecting children.' “ With this, their control over your children will be complete. This takes it much further than did the “Child Abuse Prevention And Treatment Act of 1974 (CAPTA),” which gave local “child abus . . .protectors” the INCENTIVE to interfere in your raising of your children so they could “criminalize” parents and dispense with their parental right to complain when their children are taught socialism as an ideal in school. Hitler knew if you could get to the children early, it would be easier to control them later. So does Obama. (The Patriot Post)

Another Step

2009-07-30T12:17:00.000-07:00

Obama’s government is taking one more step in the direction of destroying the rights of America’s parents to make decisions for their children. No parent wants his/her child to be sexually active at 15 to 17 years of age. But this law, which allows those as young as 17 to buy a “morning after pill” WITHOUT their parents being notified, does so.. This means they can gaily have sex at a very young age (an age at which an adult would go to prison for having sex with them) and get a “morning after pill” without their parent’s knowledge. For my part, I want to KNOW if my 17-year-old grandchild is having sex, so I can at least advise them on safe practices if nothing else. The very fact that she needs a “morning after pill” tells me she’s not having “safe sex” and could very well be infected with a dangerous sexually-transmitted disease and not know it until too late. This trend is evident, not only in this instance, but in the way parents are treated by “child services” whenever somebody makes an ANONYMOUS “report” of child abuse, sometimes at the advice of a lawyer to get their opponent’s mind off a suit in another action entirely. Since there is NO penalty, even if the “report” is a vicious attempt to hurt an innocent person, gives people an INCENTIVE to make such reports while the “child protectors” treat such “reports” as “gospel.” As “prima-facie evidence” that abuse has occurred, treating the parents as “guilty until proven innocent” while their “captive courts” accept the worker's OPINIONS as “evidence,” rather than the hearsay it usually is. (Yahoo News/AP)

Get to the Children Early

2009-07-19T13:03:00.000-07:00

The Nazis knew the best way to have no trouble with the populace in the future was to “get to the children early” while they’re too young to know what’s best, and teach them what you want to teach; in this case, collectivism (socialism). So they passed a law: The Child Abuse Prevention And Treatment Act of 1974, (CAPTA). This law set up a system of BONUSES, paid to local child protection agencies at every juncture. When they TOOK children as a FIRST OPTION, with or without proven child abuse. While in their custody, they can “program” them in any way they wished. Moreover, they could “put the fear of God” in parents and eliminate parental rights, based on real, or IMAGINED child abuse therefore stopping them from objecting effectively when their children are being taught collectivism (socialism) as an ideal in school. They paid “the locals” for every HOUR the child was “in the system,” and for every DAY.

If they were able to revoke the parent’s rights and put the children up for adoption, they got $4,500 to $6,000 PER CHILD from the government. That this gives them an INCENTIVE to take children from their parents on the smallest pretext, keeping them as long as they can, and finally putting them up for adoption need not be said. Locals themselves made money in the form of “bonuses” for the number of children they were able top take from their parents for “performance.” They received promotions based on their “performance,” and THAT means more money. Yes, SOME are just “good people” doing a “hard job.” Others do whatever they have to do to get those bonuses and promotions. The “good people” are often ORDERED to do things they don’t wish to do by their bosses, who are often just looking for those bonuses. It’s a scam to deprive parents of control over what their children are taught in school. (Just common sense)

Controlling Your Children

2009-07-19T12:57:00.000-07:00

The government already controls what is taught your children from age five up, which has already created a country made up of "collectivist (socialist) believers," since even the TEACHERS now are such, having been brought up in this socialist-teaching atmosphere. Now they want to control them from BIRTH. “That, in essence, is what Barack Obama proposes in his " ‘Zero to Five’ plan -- a collection of programs aimed at getting the government involved in the raising of your children literally from the moment they are born. Not only would his plan increase the incentives for mothers to put their children in someone else's care -- but parents who insist on caring for their own children will be taxed more to pay for it while getting nothing out of it. Down the road, mothers who refuse will be PROSECUTED as “child abusers.” The mechanism is already in place. That's the way it works. (Human Events)

I'm NOT Against Child Protection!

2009-05-17T10:34:00.000-07:00

I saw a billboard once that consisted of many repetitions of one phrase: “Never hurt a child!” Over and over again. I couldn’t agree more with the sentiment. Unfortunately the people who put up that billboard do not mean a word of it. People criticize me because they THINK I’m against child protection, but I’m not. I’m against what PASSES for child protection today, preventing the “child protectors” from having time to go after REAL child abusers. They have “hot lines” set up where you can call in an ANONYMOUS “report” of child abuse. They take that as “prima-facie evidence” of child abuse and TAKE the child as a FIRST OPTION while forcing the parents to “jump through many hoops” to avoid being falsely (mostly) charged with child abuse. They do everything they can to CRIMINALIZE parents so they can ultimately put their children up for adoption, therefore earning up to $6,000 PER CHILD if they’re successful. More than 80% of ALL child abuse reports are NOT sustainable (by their own figures, which they play down), yet they treat EACH one as if just the report is evidence of abuse. This robs them of the time and resources to go after REAL child abusers. This is why so many children ARE raped, physically abused, even murdered, mostly AFTER abuse has been reported in their family.

They just don’t have the time or manpower to go after all of them, so they continue to harass people even after it has become obvious there is NO child abuse in their family. They use such murders, and those that actually happen IN their custody as “fund-raisers” when they happen, claiming not enough money in their budgets, and therefore not enough people to do all the work. When the “investigation” ends, they get a bigger budget, fire or transfer (lateral shift) a few low-ranking workers (victims), hire more top-echelon people, and it’s “business as usual.” They’re in it for the money. They get FEES from the feds at every juncture, from the first HOUR after TAKING the child from his/her parents. Every step they take profits the “child protectors” one way or another; mostly in the form of “bonuses” for “good work” (meaning how many kids they are able to take, and how many adoptions they can arrange). If these people were really interested in “protecting” children, they’d recognize it when a parent is innocent of abuse and use their time more wisely, going after REAL child abusers while NOT abusing the child themselves by their practices.

In Arizona they used to have a “medical procedure” called Plethysmography (I think that’s how they spelled it) where they put a penis-shaped probe into the vagina of a child as young as 12 and showed her government-made pornography to “judge her level of interest in certain sexual acts. With a boy it was a ring-shaped sensor placed around the base of his penis. If the boy had supposedly been sexually abused by a man, they used the penis-shaped sensor in his anus to see if he liked it. If this is NOT “child abuse,” I don’t know what is. When they were “found out,” they stopped it. But I wouldn’t be surprised if they were doing it again now—or just doing it somewhere else. Sexually abusing the child while calling it “treatment.” I was the VICTIM of the “child abus—protectors” early in my life. They stole two of my children while I was out of state, arresting my second wife for child abuse. They couldn’t prove it (even in THEIR “captive courts”) and the charges were dropped.

But they kept the boys and put them up for adoption after giving me an erroneous day for the supposed “final hearing” at which our parental rights were to be revoked so I didn’t show up. Previously, every time I showed up, they postponed it. The day I did not show up, it was done in ten minutes. I have not seen my two boys in more than 35 years. I don’t know if they’re alive or dead. No charges were EVER lodged against me and the ones against my wife were dropped. But they destroyed my family anyway. It’s even worse today than it was then because they passed a federal law to MAKE it worse. The whole scam is being fed by FEDERAL “fees” paid to local agencies from the moment they take a child from his/her parents. So they have a definite INCENTIVE to take the child as a FIRST option. THIS is why I’m against “child protection” as it is today (Just common sense)

Teaching Children About Gay Sex?

2009-05-17T08:38:00.000-07:00

In California (Alameda: I don’t know if it’s Alameda County or the City of Alameda. The story doesn’t say) they insist on teaching KINDERGARTEN children about gay sex to “eradicate homophobia,” a “made-up word” to intimate that anybody who is against homosexuality is somehow "mentally aberrant." I have nothing against what people do in the privacy of their bedrooms. That’s their business, not mine. But when they INSIST on teaching KINDERGARTEN-age children about ANY kind of sex, I draw the line. I don’t much like it when they simply OFFER such courses. But I’m violently OPPOSED to it when they make it MANDATORY. Of course, the “child protectors” have been working to destroy parental authority for a long time. I guess they think they’ve made enough progress in that direction that they can call any parents who object to such teachings “abusers” and get away with it. I don’t think so. (One News Now)

"Business As Usual" at CPS

2009-04-15T13:03:00.000-07:00

“BUSINESS AS USUAL” AT CPS: “The Sacramento County grand jury ripped Child Protective Services in a report released today, saying the agency has ignored repeated recommendations for improvement and that CPS has ‘persistent, recurring and systemic problems resulting in child abuse-related deaths.The Grand Jury has reported on the shortcomings of CPS since 1996,’ said a cover letter from grand jury foreman Donald W. Prange Sr. ‘Findings and recommendations have fallen on deaf ears. Nothing Ever Changes ... Ever,’ he typed in bold-face.” Is anybody surprised? This is what happens every time the “child protectors” are “investigated.” They ignore the court’s orders and continue to do the same things that got them in trouble before. More children are killed and abused (sexually and otherwise) and they continue to “poor mouth” us using it as a "fund raiser," saying they’d “like to do what the court ordered, but they’re too ‘slammed’ with work and just don’t have enough money or people to get the job done.” Of course, that’s a lie, but the court believes them, gives them more money to hire more people, and life (for everybody but some of the children) goes on--until the next child dies or is sexually or otherwise abused and they can’t hide it. Then we do it all again. (Sacramento Bee)
http://www.sacbee.com/1089/story/1782539.html

This Is Child Protection

2009-01-21T14:29:00.000-08:00

“In September, an HSLDA [Home School Legal Defense Association –RT] member family in Sinton was visited by a social worker who had a list of allegations an anonymous tipster had called in. The list included that the family homeschools, that the children are sent to bed ‘really early’ and do not play with neighbor kids, and that there are firearms in the home.” All things that are legal to intelligent persons. In this case this “dastardly family” sent their kids to bed too early and they must be punished! They also homeschooled their kids and had firearms in the house! (Last I heard, there was a constitutional protection for “guns in the house”) That’s the opinion of the “child protectors.” How stupid ARE they? They also punish parents for “grounding” their children for “acting out,” and for other things parents do to be able to control their children. Thus, they “send a message” to your kids that their parents have NO authority over them and they can do as they wish. That all they have to do is “drop a dime (now a quarter) on their parents if they don’t like the way they’re being punished and the “child protectors” will take care of it. Then, when they predictably get in trouble, they (the “child protectors”) want to blame the parents. This will ultimately destroy parental authority over their children. But that’s what the “child protectors” are after. Then their parents cannot object when their schools brainwash them to believe socialism is a “good thing” (as one of my nephews told me one day). (HSLDA)

11 Kids Abandoned in Nebraska

2008-11-26T13:13:00.000-08:00

Some of the older ones because their parents were not able to control them. And why is that? Because the "child protectors" and their propaganda have convinced people's children that all they have to do if they're "dissatisfied" in any way with their treatment at the hands of their parents, is to call CPS and they'll "take care of it." Some kids have "made the call" simply because their parents would not let them go to the movies or have confined them to their rooms with all their toys because they had violated the rules. And CPS routinely sides with the kids, "chiding" parents about "being too restrictive." Soon those kids "get the message" that their parents no longer have any authority over them and, when they predictably get in trouble, they (CPS) want to blame the parents. Pretty soon those kids are no longer able to be "handled." I don't blame some of those parents for "abandoning" those kids in a safe manner. Things can get pretty nasty if kids REFUSE to be "controlled. If my children were in that age bracket and continually defied my authority, making them impossible to handle, I would tell them if they kept it up I'd turn them over to the "child protectors" and they wouldn't like that, not a bit. I would hope that would "cure" the problem and make them more amenable to the rules. If they kept it up, soon they'd be "in the system," being passed around from foster home to foster home, even being abused and sexually abused, sometimes by the foster parents, and other times by fellow foster children. I would hope they didn't push me that far. They don't know just how hard it would be to get themselves back home. Maybe not possible at all, because once the "child protectors" get their hands on them, they're like leeches, and just won't let go unless forced. And when they become adults, the "child protectors" will just abandon them without even giving them a change of clothes and a little money, the way the prison system DOES for criminals when they let them out of THEIR "system." (Yahoo News)

Foster Child Murders

2008-11-26T13:09:00.000-08:00

It's difficult to find any news source that actually mentions the fact that murdered seven-year-old child, Chandler Grafner was murdered by his FOSTER parents, not his own parents. I had to search for a long time to find this Denver Post article. The problem is, there are TOO MANY children being assaulted, sexually assaulted, and even murdered IN foster care, where they're supposed to be safe. But their own figures (CPS) show that the chance of children being hurt or killed while IN foster care is much higher than in their own homes (although they "bury" it in a mass of statistics). The man who killed him was a foster parent, assigned by CPS, although he CLAIMED to be his "biological father," having at one time been his mother's boyfriend. Then there is the more recent case of a COP who was foster parent to a little girl, and who fondled her one day while she was playing on a swing. He is now on suspension and is "putting in his retirement papers" while awaiting trial. This story is so new I couldn't find mention of it in the media, but what I DID find was a site that listed MANY instances of policemen sexually assaulting children. (YouNewz)

Foster Parent Starves Child to Death

2008-08-06T12:36:00.000-07:00

And I won't add the usually obligatory "alleged" to this because medical experts who have autopsied many children WITH diabetes have already testified that Chandler Grafton DID NOT have diabetes and had "stopped growing" five or more days before he died, which is, to those who do autopsies, obvious evidence of starvation. I've said for a long time that children are in dire danger from some foster parents, more than they ever were in their own homes, and they keep on proving me right. Their own figures prove me right (although they play them down). I still don't know what happened to my own two boys that they stole from my second wife and me more than thirty years ago, with no provable charges against her and none ever laid on me. They may be dead. I don't know. If they were, does anybody think CPS would tell me, their parent? (Rocky Mountain News)

Ho Hum, Business As Usual at CPS

2008-08-06T12:07:00.000-07:00

"Sacramento County officials announce Tuesday that they will hire an independent expert to conduct a CPS critical case and practice review. At the announcement, from left to right are Nav Gill, Sacramento County Chief Operations Officer, Lynn Frank, director of the Department of Health and Human Services, Roger Dickinson, County Supervisor, Laura Coulthard, CPS Director and Ann Edwards-Buckley, deputy administrator." Here we go again. They'll "investigate" CPS practices and will predictably agree with them that they don't have enough money or enough people for their caseload. So they'll give them more money and "turn them loose," as usual. There MIGHT be one or two "scapegoats," but most of the people responsible for those deaths of children under CPS auspices will go on doing what they've done for years, abusing children and their parents in the name of "child protection." In Denver, a child was systematically starved to death by a FOSTER PARENT, so we'll probably get another "Governor's Committee" to investigate CPS (again) and the same thing will happen (as it has many times in the past). (Sacramento Bee)

Child Deaths in CPS "System"

2008-07-30T13:09:00.000-07:00

The "child protectors" take the child as a FIRST option in most cases, and put them "in the system," to "protect them" from abuse at home. But their own figures show that these children are much more apt to be abused, even KILLED "in the system" than they ever were at home. It's all a scam to gain CONTROL over your children and keep you from demanding they not be taught socialism as an idea in school. Where it all goes wrong is when those children are abused and KILLED while "in the system." They're routinely ABUSED there, and sometimes KILLED. There have been FIVE such deaths in California recently. I wonder haw many there have been in Denver recently. If there have been, they have been well covered up. How about in YOUR area? Robert Littleton, a blogger who posted a simple list of children who have died IN the child protectors' custody, bent to intimidation and took the list down after threats of suits, you can guess from whom. (Robert Littleton)

Court Overrules Dad

2008-07-15T12:24:00.000-07:00

Girl keeps visiting web sites her dad disapproves of; she posts "inappropriate" pictures of herself on the Internet, and her dad "grounds" her for misconduct. The court thought that was "too much" and disallowed it. This happened in Canada, and columnist Paul Jacob says it won't affect us here in the "good old United States." Who has been doing his research? It IS happening here, and much worse! The "child protectors" are "out of control" and think they don't have to follow the law; their "captive courts" agree with them and they lose every time a case actually gets to a higher court because their regular actions violate not only the civil rights of parents, but of children, too. Does this stop them? Naaah! It doesn't even slow them down. They just "surrender" in the one case and go on violating people's tights in every other case they handle. Doesn't affect us here? Sheesh! Do some research, Paul! Otherwise, he's exactly right. (Common Sense)

"But That's How We've Always Done It!"

2008-06-14T13:36:00.000-07:00

That's their "defense" to the Texas "raid" and subsequent removal of almost 500 children from a "religious compound" ranch. In other words, they ALWAYS violate the rights of parents AND children in order to "protect" those children from "abuse" that may or may not be only in the imaginations of child protection agents with "dirty minds." They think they have the "right" to do this because it's "for the children," the usual cry whenever any government agency wants to violate people's rights. "The tactics perpetrated on the YFZ families are the same ones that CPS uses in almost every child-protection removal case nationwide: insufficient investigation, a superficial initial hearing, a boilerplate case plan whose real purpose is to provide evidence to the agency, splitting children in foster care and moving them far from family, a low standard of proof for abuse, and failure to use reasonable efforts to avoid removal from the home, among others. What turned this situation around was the extensive publicity that exposed the normally hidden agency wrongdoing. These revelations forced the higher court to reverse the rulings of the agency and of the lower court, which was acting as a puppet of the agency. If each of these 468 cases had been adjudicated individually, hidden from public scrutiny in secret courtrooms as the law provides, the agency might have won most of them, despite having no evidence." Maybe this case will "open" the "can of worms" that is the "child protectors" and force some REAL reorganization with the realization that they cannot, and should not be allowed to violate the rights of parents AND children, "willy-nilly." As one of their victims 30 years ago, with NO proof of wrongdoing on my part, I hope so. "This episode should be a warning to all families that an arbitrary attack by the state against a family can happen to any of us and that a court will likely not protect the family from overreaching state social workers or false reports of child abuse." (The New American)

"ATTEMPTED" Child Abuse?

2008-06-05T13:05:00.000-07:00

He raped a THREE-YEAR-OLD CHILD and they let him "plead out" to a charge of "ATTEMPTED" child abuse? Maybe he needed Viagara and didn't have any, so he couldn't get the job done. But a THREE-YEAR-OLD CHILD? There has to be something worse than ATTEMPTED child abuse for him. Maybe when he gets to prison one of the other prisoners might have some ideas on what should be done with a "baby-raper." I notice the article about it wasn't very specific. Maybe they just couldn't bear to write about a man who had sex with a THREE-YEAR-OLD? Maybe the "child protectors" couldn't get to him before he did it because they were too busy going after people they KNEW weren't guilty, but from whom they could siphon the most money? (MSNBC)

"CPS Exceeds Authority"

2008-05-29T15:25:00.000-07:00

So what else is new? They do that every time they go out on a "case." But their excessive acts do not usually involve hundreds of children who are "taken" because they "might" have been abused in the past or "might" be abused in the future. Yes, I'm sure there were a number of children who were forced into "marrying" older men, thinking it was "how the world worked." They didn't think they were "forced" because they were taught from birth this was the "right way" to go and they didn't know any different. But that is not an excuse for "child protectors" to just walk in and "take" hundreds of children, even if they don't believe in their religious concepts of "marriage." Each case should be considered on its own merits BEFORE any children are taken from their parents. I'm sure this case is not over, but it should be much better done without hundreds of children being taken as a "first option" as CPS (or whatever they're called there) generally does. (Houston Chronicle)

B-B-But That's The Way They Operate!

2008-05-28T11:49:00.000-07:00

And they get away with it all the time because mostly the courts in which they operate are their own "captive courts" where "evidence" can be nothing more than a worker's opinion. Where they screwed up this time is trying to do it in front of the world and NATIONAL media. They couldn't keep operating as judge, jury, and executioner themselves, and the judge who "caught the case" realized that. There may have been many underage "mothers" or mothers who were underage when they were forced into marriage with much older men. But unfortunately, the proof just wasn't easily obtainable and the "child protectors" just aren't used to operating under such restrictions). So these underage mothers or FORMER underage mothers will be reunited with their husbands and many co-wives, and things will "go back to (their kind of) normal." This isn't about multiple wives, which IS illegal everywhere in this country. It's about forcing CHILDREN to be screwed by old men and become the mothers of their many children. They need to keep on investigating this situation without involving the "child protectors," who routinely exceed their authority and, unless it's in THEIR courts, can screw it up royally. (Café Hayek)

The "Power of God"

2008-05-20T12:09:00.000-07:00

"The Illinois Department of Children and Family Services erroneously labeled 3,051 innocent people as child abusers by placing them on the state's official list." And the law requires that once you get on the list, innocent or guilty, you have to remain there for five years. That this can ruin your life doesn't seem to matter. 'They're not all bad, there are good ones,' Nick Brunstein reportedly said of state child abuse investigators, 'but the bad ones have the power of God, and with the stroke of a pen they can ruin your life.' " And they do it routinely in ALL states. These people have WAY too much power. They need to be "reined in." (World Net Daily)

Typical "Child Protector Trainwreck"

2008-05-14T11:31:00.000-07:00

"If the head of the Florida Department of Children and Families doesn't get mentally ill inmates out of the Pinellas County Jail soon, she might join them behind bars. A Pinellas judge Tuesday charged DCF Secretary Lucy Hadi with seven counts of indirect criminal contempt for failing to get the inmates out of the jail. The maximum penalty for each of those counts is five months and 29 days in jail." This is a typical "trainwreck" with the child protectors. Judges created the problem by increasing the number of mentally ill people in jail by 100%, then got "irate" because the child protectors couldn't "magically" come up with the money to obey the court order. But they did. They magically "found" $5 million dollars "under seat cushions on the couch." Whether this is enough to solve the problem, nobody knows. But if it isn't they're going to have to "find" more, or the director of the agency is going to jail. Notice all this does NOTHING to "help" children. Janet Reno would be pleased. (St. Petersburg Times)

Removing Consequences and Making Hoodlums

2008-05-13T12:19:00.000-07:00

I've long said that when you remove the consequences for an act, people are going to DO that act and expect to get away with it. The biggest example of this is the "know-nothing do-gooder" who knows nothing about what is going on, but who sticks her/his nose in it anyway. Nothing is a better example than the situation below: "The liberals have been taking away our rights and liberties for years, and this is just another example of this invasion of our privacy. ‘The woman that started this whole thing took offense to a child being spanked for acting bad. She had no idea what was really going on, but she made it her business to butt in.' And I will tell you where this whole idea of crap is going to end up. We are going to have, in the future, a generation of hoodlums who have grown up without any idea of what is right and what is wrong. [That's in bold because it's the most important thing in this post. -RT] To them there will be no consequences for their actions, and there will be no stimulus for them to do the right things. The only input that these children will have, is negative input because when they are good, nothing will be said. When they are bad, they will be called victims by the authorities and they will be coddled by the government and taken away from good parents." This is liberalism at work. (Tired of Liberal Rhetoric)

Easier Release of Child Death Info

2008-05-01T09:35:00.000-07:00

In Memphis, they're trying to make it easier to get the release of information about children who die of child abuse. But you'll notice nothing is said about children who die while IN the "child protection system." The information about those deaths, beatings, and rapes will continue to be hidden behind their "confidentiality" policies to "protect the children," dont'cha know? I think those "confidentiality laws" should be altered to allow the release of information about abuse suffered "in the system," so the "child protectors" cannot hide behind "confidentiality." (Memphis Daily News)

Yet Another "Governor's Committee on Child Abuse"

2008-04-24T11:20:00.000-07:00

Gov. Ritter is incensed that 13 children have died last year IN CUSTODY of the child protectors, so he's "forming a committee" to look into it and come up with "changes." Maybe they'll do something concrete. I don't know. I was a member of such a committee a couple of governors ago, and when I came up with some concrete things wrong with child protection in Colorado and some suggestions to go with them, from that point on, I couldn't find out when or where the next meeting was. The next year, the committee completed its work and the child protectors (predictably) got more money to pay for "more people." The government is the only place I can think of where you can use incompetence as a "fund-raiser." Nobody got fired, although a number of low-level workers got "transferred" (a "lateral transfer"). I hope the same thing doesn't happen again. I'll be watching. (CBS 4 Denver)

Not Like the Branch Davidians

2008-04-10T12:26:00.000-07:00

When local cops went to Warren Jeffs' "child sex compound" after a child called them complaining she was forced into sex with a 50-year-old man, it was not like Waco. At Waco, they just wanted to "take down" the group and used possible sexual abuse of children as their excuse, and wound up killing many of the children they told usd they went there to "save." Here, there is a "compound" where it is well known "old men" regularly screw little girls who have nothing to say about it and are afraid to say or do anything about it. The courageous child who called the cops has not been found, and might even be dead, killed to "save" their "child sex compound." They may never find her, or her body. This is what happens when the "child protectors" treat every "report" they get as "prima-facie evidence" of abuse, even if no proof is there and thus, have such large caseloads that they tend to ignore such things as Jeffs' "compound" because it's too much work. They only notice when they get a call from a VICTIM who says she has been repeatedly raped by "old men" without her permission, nor knowledge that she has a right to refuse. Finally, they went in, when they HAD TO, and found HUNDREDS of small girls (after the article linked here was published) who had been similarly sexually abused on a regular basis. It was a "way of life" for them, for as long as they could remember. So what will happen now? The "child protectors" will excuse their failure by saying they "don't have enough people nor enough money." Then they will get more money and more people and will, as usual, have used failure as a "fund-raiser" while life goes on, "business as usual." (Parrerico)

Screwing Little Girls

2008-04-09T12:49:00.000-07:00

Jeff's "Yearning for Zion" Compound

Warren Jeffs and his "co-conspirators aren't just having sex with a lot of women. They're also having sex with little girls. They SAY they're "marrying" these little girls, but they're "marrying" them in wholesale numbers and against their will. These little girls have nothing to say about whether or not they want to have sex with these "old men." These "old men" have convinced their parents it's okay to "marry" children at just barely teen-age. This is not a case of "religious tolerance." It is a case of "child sex abuse" DISGUISED as "religious tolerance." These people should be "put away," and forced to register as sex offenders, as would happen with the average sex offender. There's nothing worst than this kind of person, who would claim "religious authority" for their child sex abuse. They've still not found the little girl who called them, which makes you wonder what happened to her. Did they just change her name and hide her, or is she dead. Are these people just "child-screwers" or murderers, too? Gawd, I get so sick of hearing stories like this! I'm offended that there are people like this allowed to remain in this world. There are some people who are only still alive because it's illegal to kill them, and these people match that description. This is one case where I wish the "child protectors" had not been so busy going after innocent parents that they had no time to go after this KNOWN child abuser compound. (KUTV)

School "Crotch Inspectors"

2008-04-05T10:20:00.000-07:00

What would you think if your children were subjected to "crotch inspections" to see if they were secreting ASPIRIN in their pants? Boy! What a neat excuse for someone who likes to look at little boys and little girls naked to get APPROVAL to strip search children 13 and under at school? I've heard of this before, but I thought school "authorities" had learned their lesson before they found themselves unemployed or in prison for child abuse. But apparently they've learned nothing in Safford,Arizona, where they do this regularly, and with COURT APPROVAL! (Notice it's the oft-reversed 9th Circuit Court that made that decision). I wonder how many children will be scarred by this experience before "wiser heads" reverse their decision (as usual)? In 2003, on the unsupported word of a student caught with a small number of 400 Mg Ibuprofen pills, an Honor Student with NO record of anything but superlative grades was summarily strip-searched without notification of her parents OR any kind of a warrant. What makes these people think they have the power to do such things is beyond me. If there was any REAL danger, they should call the parent and have THEM do any searches they feel necessary. Jacob Sullum says, "Sometimes it's hard to tell the difference between "drug warriors" and "child molesters." I agree. Maybe because there IS no difference in some cases. The girl said it was the most humiliating experience she had ever had. The school principal (Robert Beeman) said the strip-search was "no big deal" because they didn't find anything and did it on the unsupported accusation of the student who was in trouble and wanted to "share" it. I say this supercilious jerk is wrong. It WAS a "big deal" BECAUSE they didn't find anything! This will not be the last such report, as liberals get more and more power. The "child protectors" weren't even involved, according to this report. (The Atlasphere/Jacob Sullum)

Is Anybody Surprised?

2008-03-13T11:06:00.001-07:00

Like Rush Limbaugh, "I toldya so!" The report on how to stop killing more children next year is in: and as I predicted, it calls for "more money and more people." Specifically, they're going to "create a new position" of "child protection director" and spend nearly $1.7 million MORE to hire 65 new workers (PLUS the 40 other new workers they've already got a $2 million dollar increase in funding to hire). The Denver Department of Human Resources said, "There is a critical need to continue to develop new staff capacity in order to enable staff to make the right decisions for each child and family." Bureaucrat-speak for "if we just had more money and more people, we cold do a competent job," thus predictably turning incompetence into a fund-raiser. (Denver Post)

Surprise, Surprise!

2008-03-02T11:53:00.000-08:00

"From one end of Colorado to another, in farm towns and urban centers, people are seeing -- or think they are seeing -- child abuse and neglect on an unprecedented scale. Statewide, the number of child-abuse reports has soared, from 42,559 in 2001 to 68,657 in 2006, a 61 percent jump, state figures show. But whether it is because those reports are patently unfounded or because their sheer numbers overwhelm child welfare agencies strained by years of budget cuts, almost half of those reports are never checked out." The fact is, 80% or more -- by their own numbers -- of such reports ARE unfounded because there is no penalty for those who make such reports, even if they're not only wrong, but are intentionally wrong, made to distract people's attention from other things. It has become a well-known fact that lawyers routinely advise their clients to make such reports for this reason, to take their opponent's attention off the action they're in. The "child protectors" do "investigate" as many of these "reports" as they can, but the sheer volume of "reports" makes it impossible for them to get to many of them, and they then "miss" REAL child abuse and children are killed or injured. Add to that the fact that (again by their own numbers, hard to find) children are much more apt to die, be injured, or raped while IN foster care just makes it worse. This story in the Denver Post comes right out and confirms my statement that 80% or more "reports" are unfounded when they say, "When referrals are investigated, abuse or neglect typically is substantiated in about 20 percent of cases, state figures show." [Emphasis mine -RT] If the "child protectors" would stop treating every case as if it were true, and the "report" prima-facie evidence of abuse, spending a lot more time on each case than necessary, just to collect those ubiquitous federal fees, they'd have time to get to the REAL cases of child abuse that go ignored today. I don't believe the Post is surprised at this. I think they're just pretending. The result of this "expose" will be more money for the "child protectors," a few low level "heads" will roll, and it will be "business as usual." Government, and especially the "child protectors are the only organizations who can turn failure into "fund-raising." (The Denver Post)

Can't Control Kids, Goes on Strike

2008-02-24T12:39:00.000-08:00

Melissa Dean

Melissa Dean, a Walgreen's manager, got tired of being bullied by her own 4 sons and she couldn't get any help from "authorities," so she "went on strike" and stayed away from them most of the time. Boy, did THAT get a response from "the authorities," which charged her with "neglect." She would even cook meals and deliver them to her home while the boys weren't there, as you might with an animal who might charge you if he saw you. "The Authorities" teach the children that she has no authority over them and can't touch them in any way. That contributed to this situation because when they predictably get in trouble, they want to blame the parent. In this case, they ignored a major "problem situation" until it became something they could blame on her. No one has said what happened to the kids, but I'd bet they're minding a lot better, wherever they are now, or will end up in jail. (Local 6 News)

Child Protectors "Not Tough Enough"

2008-02-21T10:12:00.000-08:00

A story in the Denver Post whines about the new rules given to child protectors might account for fewer children being ripped from their homes on just the "suspicion" that abuse might occur in the future. They fear that the increase in the number of kids not taken from their homes might be responsible for the increase in child deaths due to abuse. Nowhere do they say that all those child deaths occurred in their own homes, rather than in a foster home. From what I've seen in the last few years, most of the child deaths did happen in foster homes and those that didn't were in homes where the "abuse factor" was either obviously nonexistent or so obvious it couldn't be denied, but was ignored by the child protectors in their haste to get to other homes where they could "maximize income" for their agencies because taking the child and being able to put them up for adoption would be easier. It was very rare for such a death to come "out of the blue." They say right out, " 'The intent is not to get more kids to remain in in-home care, it's to make sure your safety response is the best fit and least intrusive, but also the most appropriate for the family on an individualized basis,' [Wayne] Holder said." Looks like they're trying to make it much easier to break up families by "crying wolf." As usual, they want tighter control over your children and less accountability for themselves, and they mean to get it, by "hook or crook." (Denver Post)

Smoking Banned in Foster Homes

2008-02-19T13:20:00.000-08:00

They'll ban smoking anywhere they can, and claim they're "doing it for their own good." If I were a foster parent, I'd tell them where to put their fostering. I don't need their "foster care," but they DO need as many foster homes as they can get because they routinely steal children as a FIRST option rather than as a last OPTION. They don't care how many families they ruin. If they just THINK there's A possibility OF ABUSE, even "sometime in the future," they'll steal the child -- and getting them back, even if you're not guilty of ANYTHING, is almost impossible, since they use every scam and scheme in existence to block you. Innocence is no defense for the parents they target. Even if they can't prove ANY abuse now, or in the future, they'll take the child anyway, and getting them back is next to impossible. If I sound bitter it's because Indianapolis did it to me more than 30 years ago. They couldn't prove abuse on my ex-wife, but used every trick and scam they could to deny me custody. And there wasn't even a HINT of a reason for that (I wasn't even in the state) except they wanted the $12,000 they'd get (from the feds) for putting my two boys up for adoption. (Houston Chronice,)

Legislators Want DCS Split After Double Murders

2008-01-08T11:41:00.000-08:00

And what in hell is that going to solve? Make it harder for foster children with violent backgrounds to do violence again? What foster parent is going to knowingly take in a child that has committed violence? Such children ought to be placed in the juvenile jail system where they can't do violence, except maybe to other violent prisoners. They think they can treat violent offenders who happen to be children the same way they do other children? That's idiocy! The biggest danger to non-violent children in "the system" is from foster parents themselves (their own statistics show this). The second biggest danger is from other foster children. So what does "dividing them in two" do to "correct" this problem? (WKRN, 1/7/08)

"No Cause for Concern": Says State

2007-12-16T11:17:00.000-08:00

Child sex abusers held together with abused. Could there be a better recipe for disaster when child sex abusers are being held in the same institution with abused children? They beat them and regularly dope them up to "quiet them down" and ignore their pleas for "mercy." They hire the cheapest staff they can find, people who can be had for $20,000 a year or less. People with no training and in some cases, abusers themselves. And the state "sees no cause for concern." This is the kind of "protection" that is offered to "abused children" from 9 up in Nashville, Kentucky. Is it the same elsewhere? An anonymous worker who actually works there is complaining and when they figure out who she is, she'll no longer work there because "the inmates are running the asylum." Not the kids, the adults. The fact that state officials see "no cause for concern" itself concerns me. I can only pray that none of my family ever gets sent there. Think about how many adult sex offenders they are creating there. How about those who become serial killers because of their treatment in this facility? I think this facility should be closed immediately and most of its staff imprisoned. (Nashville Scene, 12/13/07)

"Child Protector" Arrested for Child Abuse

2007-12-05T09:33:00.000-08:00

If she found a mother beating her child with a belt so badly there were still marks on her body a month later, she'd have her arrested for child abuse and the child would be taken from her immediately. But she works for the "child protectors" (under whatever name they use), so even though she, herself, has been arrested, she still works for them and draws a paycheck. "I have never abused my children," says Cylenthia Clark, who is in obvious denial. What does it take for this agency to fire somebody? They destroy the lives of other parents for a lot less. (Protected & Murdered, 3/14/07)

Another Foster Child Murdered

2007-12-05T09:08:00.000-08:00

Ken Taylor got mad at one of his many foster children, so he murdered him. There were many complaints against him for neglecting his foster children before that, but they were ignored by the "child protectors." His foster children were coming and going freely at all hours, and some were even breaking into homes in the neighborhood and stealing things. Complaints were sent to the "child protectors" and were routinely ignored. At one point, a "child protector" spokesman claimed to be "unaware of any problems" in the home. "Unaware." After many complaints. I predict that this incident will be "investigated," that DCF will claim "not enough money to keep track of foster homes," and "not enough people (a result of not enough money) to check them out, DCF will get an increased budget, a few "small fry" in DCF will be fired or "reassigned" (a bureaucratic way to get rid of wrongdoers without punishing them) and life will go on. It will be "business as usual" until the next foster child is murdered by a foster parent. Then we'll do it all again and another foster child will be buried. (Knoxville News-Sentinel, 11/29/07)

Corrupt Child Protectors

2007-12-01T12:44:00.000-08:00

Elsewhere we tell you about an article written by Nancy Schaefer, candidate for the Senate, after she was alerted by a victimized grandmother. But there was way too much information in that article to be covered here in one item. This item is about the general corruption and racketeering prevalent in child protection services (whatever they call them) nationwide [Worldwide, if you ask me. -RT]. Here's what Sen. Schaefer said: "In one county in my District, I arranged a meeting for thirty-seven families to speak freely and without fear. These poor parents and grandparents spoke of their painful, heart wrenching encounters with DFCS. Their suffering was overwhelming. They wept and cried. Some did not know where their children were and had not seen them in years. I had witnessed the 'Gestapo' at work and I witnessed the deceitful conditions under which children were taken in the middle of the night, out of hospitals, off of school buses, and out of homes. In one county a private drug testing business was operating within the DFCS department that required many, many drug tests from parents and individuals for profit. In another county children were not removed when they were enduring the worst possible abuse. Due to being exposed, several employees in a particular DFCS office were fired. However, they have now been rehired either in neighboring counties or in the same county again [It was all done for "window dressing" -RT]. According to the calls I am now receiving, the conditions in that county are returning to the same practices that they had before the light was shown on their deeds. Having worked with probably 300 cases statewide, I am convinced there is no responsibility and no accountability in the system." It's about time ONE senator figured things out. Maybe the world will begin to see the "Gestapo" tactics that are being regularly used against mostly innocent families while the "child protectors" ignore other cases where there is REAL child abuse for lack of time and personnel (They use this situation as a "fund-raiser" when they're caught out.). (Sen. Nancy Schaefer, 11/16/07)

Legally Kidnapped

2007-12-01T12:41:00.000-08:00

This article was written by Nancy Schaefer, candidate for the Senate, and is on her web site's main page. But since that could change quickly, I went to this blog, which reprinted it in full: "My introduction into child protective service cases was due to a grandmother in an adjoining state who called me with her tragic story. Her two granddaughters had been taken from her daughter who lived in my district. Her daughter was told wrongly that if she wanted to see her children again she should sign a paper and give up her children [Which if she did, would net the "child protectors" anywhere from $9,000 to $12,000 in "fees" from the feds. -RT]. Frightened and young, the daughter did. I have since discovered that parents are often [Almost always. -RT] threatened into cooperation of permanent separation of their children. The children were taken to another county and placed in foster care. The foster parents were told wrongly that they could adopt the children. The grandmother then jumped through every hoop known to man in order to get her granddaughters. When the case finally came to court it was made evident by one of the foster parent’s children that the foster parents had, at any given time, 18 foster children and that the foster mother had an inappropriate relationship with the caseworker. In the courtroom, the juvenile judge, acted as though she was shocked and said the two girls would be removed quickly. They were not removed. Finally, after much pressure being applied to the Department of Family and Children Services of Georgia (DFCS), the children were driven to South Georgia to meet their grandmother who gladly drove to meet them. After being with their grandmother two or three days, the judge, quite out of the blue, wrote up a new order to send the girls to their father, who previously had no interest in the case and who lived on the West Coast. The father was in 'adult entertainment' [porno -RT]. His girlfriend worked as an 'escort' [prostitute -RT] and his brother, who also worked in the [porno -RT] business, had a sexual charge brought against him." This is the kind of thing "social services" does all the time, and they call it "protecting" the children. It's interesting to note that the oldest child said the "foster father" had molested her, but nothing seems to have been done about it. (Legally Kidnapped, 11/30/07)

Italians Take U. S. Soldier's Children

2007-11-29T10:21:00.000-08:00

This while she was on a mission. "On Oct. 13, police in Pordenone, Italy, took away Staff Sgt. Kris Wylie's daughters -- Leighlora, 7, and Lillian Ann, 5 -- from the custody of her Italian fiancé at their off-base home while Wylie was on a mission outside of Italy. They were put in the Italian version of Child Protective Services. 'You think of the children themselves in a strange place with strangers,' said Bob Benson, of White Bear Lake, Minn., a suburb of St. Paul. 'Fortunately they can speak the language, but they aren't with their parents; they were just ripped away, no reasons given, no paperwork, no nothing.' [So what else is new with "child protectors" everywhere? -RT] Italian authorities have charged Wylie, 28, with three counts connected to the maltreatment of children, according to Tech. Sgt. Michael O'Connor at the Aviano Air Force Base in Aviano, Italy." We've always treated our soldiers the best way we know how, but apparently the Italians don't. At least, not when the parent(s) are not Italian. The "child protector" mindset (everywhere) is a strange one. (World Net Daily, 10/20/07)

Step-Father Kills Girl

2007-11-29T09:42:00.001-08:00

"Baby Grace" wouldn't say "yes, sir" and "no sir." So he killed her. I know obstreperous children can be trying, but this girl did nothing that required a "death sentence." The mother and step-father have been arrested. I publish this because I've been criticized as being "unalterably against the "child protectors." I'm not. I AM "unalterably against" their penchant to carry EVERY "investigation" to the "bitter end," even after finding proof it is not "sustainable," so they can "maximize" the amount of money they get from the government at every juncture (they even have seminars on how to do this). Statistics (theirs, though buried) show that more than 90% of all "reports" of child abuse are "unsustainable." But they continue to spend a lot of time on them, robbing themselves of the opportunity to ferret out REAL child abuse such as this. The picture on the right is an artist's rendering they used in the search for this tiny girl, beaten to death by a (no doubt brave) man. The drawing is amazingly like the real picture, although it unfortunately looks like a ventriloquist's dummy. (AOL News,11/29/07)

Another Foster Parent Kills Child

2007-11-28T10:18:00.001-08:00

This is happening way too often, and when it does, the "child protectors" lay on the mildest possible sentence. There will no doubt be an "investigation," which the "child protectors" (or the State) will run, after which they will claim too much work (this guy had 12 kids in his home) and too little money. In other words, they'll use this as a "fund-raiser," as usual. Notice only a couple of the other kids in his "home" were removed after he killed this kid. I predict that this story will NOT make the national news. It will be kept as a "local story" so as not to alert Americans nation-wide as to what happened. This boy was obviously a "handful," from the story told. But being a handful didn't rate a death sentence. This is yet another story to illustrate the fact (born out by their own figures, albeit buried) that kids are much more likely to be hurt or even killed in "the system" than they ever were at home. (The Tennesean, 11/27/07)

Gay "Foster Parents" Accused

2007-11-27T13:17:00.000-08:00

No, they're not "legal" foster parents. But the "child protectors" thought they were a good choice to "care" for a child after his mother died. But they consistently abused him until he ran away and told the authorities (not the "child protectors") what they were doing to him. He's now back in the custody of the "child protectors." There's no telling who will get to abuse him next, while in their "care." This is nothing against their "gayness," but I wouldn't turn ANY defenseless child over to the "tender mercies" of this duo. This is yet another case where the child was in more danger while "in the system" than anywhere else. (ABC News, 11/27/07)

"Shaken Baby Syndrome" Exposed as Fraud

2007-11-13T13:38:00.000-08:00

We've heard a lot about "shaken baby syndrome" recently and there's even an ongoing television commercial about it that runs sometimes several times an evening. But now we hear it has been "over diagnosed" so as to criminalize parents. The same seems to be true of "Munchausen's Syndrome." These, and other scams are routinely used by the "child protectors" to criminalize parents so they can take their children, ultimately (they hope) to terminate their parental rights and put them up for adoption. It is a not-very-well-known fact that every child they take gains them the payment of a fee from the government at every juncture while the child is "in the system," for no matter how short a time. And if they can adopt them out, they get a BIG fee for each child. Such incentives lead to further incentives by the agency to the "workers," who can earn them by stealing more children. (London Sunday Times, /07)

Profane Justice

2007-10-30T13:48:00.000-07:00

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,)

Child Sex Abuse in Foster Care

2007-10-27T13:06:00.000-07:00

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,)

Child Protection -- Double Shakedown:

2007-10-25T14:17:00.000-07:00

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,)

Another Child Murdered in Foster Care

2007-10-17T13:04:00.000-07:00

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)

Janet Reno: Chief Among Illicit Prosecutions

2007-10-14T12:10:00.000-07:00

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)

Child Sex Slaves?

2005-03-01T13:29:00.000-08:00

What happens to the children who are taken permanently from parents who have had their parental rights severed? Nobody knows because of "confidentiality." Parents who have been "beaten down" by the system don't know and don't expect to know. It's like their children are dead. The "child protectors" won't tell them and they don't expect them to. Are they legally "adopted out" (for an up to $6,000 "fee") to another "loving family" by the child protectors? Or are they sold to child sex slavers and sent to Saudi Arabia or other countries where child sex slavery is not only allowed, it's encouraged. Child sex slavers sell children not only to Muslim countries, but also to many other countries, including America. How many children disappear every day in this country and how many are found, dead or alive? You do the math. How many children are taken from their parents by the "child protectors" and never seen or heard from again? You do the math. Who is able to see the figures on this and keep track of it? Who looks over their shoulders?

What's Wrong With Child Protection?

2005-02-21T13:31:00.000-08:00

A few years ago I was a member of the Lt. Governor's Ad-Hoc Committee on Child Buse Issues, formed in response to, and supposedly to stop the death of another child in foster care. I was a member until I offered a report that "told it like it is" about what's wrong with the child protectors and child protection as it is today. From that point on, I couldn't get a straight answer out of anybody about the place and time of any future meeting. I was effectively "bounced" from the committee. Later they released their "report," the child proteftors were given more money, a couple of low-level child protectors were transferred (not fired) and life went on for everybody but the child who dies and the one or ones who will die next year so they can go through this charade again.

Any press is good press

2005-02-10T18:16:00.000-08:00

Suzanne Shell, preeminent defender of falsely accused parents, has been profiled in a Denver weekly, Westword. They seem to think the most important question is, "is she a meddler, as the child protectors maintain, or is she a valuable resource for the falsely accused in their fight aganst a child protector system out of control?" I've seen her in action, several times. And I'd say without fear of contradiction (truthfully) that she is definitely a valuable resource for falsely accused parents in the government's campaign to take away parental rights and authority so they can no longer put a stop to schools teaching collectivism to their children. See the complete article here.

Creating Monsters

2005-02-07T08:23:00.000-08:00

When Suzanne Shell walks into a courtroom anywhere in Colorado (or probably elsewhere, too, they assign her her own security. Not to "protect" her, but to protect the court against this little woman who has never done anything to warrant this "personal security" except to be one of the most effective advocates for the falsely accused there is. But in Colorado, "advocates" aren't allowed to help the victims of child abuse laws, so she has to "play their game" and call what she does something else.

Most cases where she assists are usually decided in favor of the family. Because she has examined their "system" completely and reduced it to a "routine" that is discernable if you examine many cases and look at the steps they take. The same scams and schemes come up over and over again, allowing those who "pay attention" to predict their actions with incredible accuracy.

But since most people haven't a clue about how the "child protectors" work, they get "run over" by a "steamroller" because of their lack of knowledge of the scams and schemes that are being used on them. I was one of them more than thirty years ago when they accused my second wife of "criminal child abuse" and took them away. This happened in Indianapolis. I was in California and had come to see the children. But it was not to be. The "child protectors" had already kidnapped them and weren't going to give them back. Even having to drop the charges against her didn't stop them from using every scam and scheme in the book to beat me in my efforts (later joined by her) to get the children back home: hers or mine.

After lying to me several times about the dates and times of hearings, hoping I would not show up, finally they succeeded after eight months of my showing up, time after time, only to have the case postponed. Finally, on the day I didn't show up, due to the erroneous information they gave me about the time and date of the meeting, it was done (snap) just like that. And I was just young and ignorant enough to think "the best interests of the children" would be served if I didn't contest it.

I saw the boys only once after that, when one day I just "showed up" at the foster home and insisted on seeing them. That was the last time I ever saw my boys, and it has been thirty or more years.

I could have avoided all that if there had been a "seminar" of the kind I attended last weekend, put on by Colorado American Family Rights Association where they didn't just attempt to "forewarn" possible victims, but they were helping the "monsters" children's services had created over the years learn how to be effective advocates (under whatever name is decided upon) for the falsely accused. In other words, a whole bunch of Suzanne Shells. She details every step the child protectors use normally in moving from kidnapping the children to taking away parental rights, and shows ways to counter them, one by one.

They "created a monster" in me when they stole my children, and they have suffered by my work when they tried (unsuccessfully) to take my one remaining son's children on equally unsustainable charges and spent $50,ooo more than they got from the feds in the attempt. They now have a "hands off" order on my son and his children. Their mother has several times made "reports" (from Utah) and the cops came out. They found no sustainable problem each time. They don't want to go into a "buzzsaw" again. It amazes me how they think they can continue to "create monsters" all over the world by their actions without suffering retribution. But they continue on, just like they weren't creating enemies wherever they go.

COAFRA is holding many seminars in coming months and years, and it would pay everybody to attend, even if they've never (yet) been bothered by the "child abus...uh, protectors." Forewarned is forearmed. And nobody is safe from them. Up to now, they've been targeting poor people and those who aren't as well-educated as they might be. But they're running out of the "easy cases," and are now beginning to go after people with a bit more money.

COAFRA has many services and much knowledge on their web site. It would pay you to go there and read everything you can. Your family integrity might depend on it. Further, you ought to get on their "mailing list" and be notified when the next seminar will take place so you can attend, before the "child protectors" turn you into a monster by stealing your children. On that site, you will find links to many helpful sources, including the national AFRA organization.

The Basic Scam

2005-02-01T11:51:00.000-08:00

For many years the public school system has failed to successfully teach our children even the most basic of American and world history, choosing, instead, to condition them to accept the Marxist notion, "From each according to his needs, and to each according to his ability," making need a demand upon the earnings of others. This is commonly known as "collectivism." It also has other names. Among them socialism, communism, Nazism, progressivism, etc. They use many different names in order to confuse people. They "soldier on," conditioning class after class of unsophisticated students (who will believe anything if it sounds good) that stealing from those who earn and giving that stolen to those who don't earn is a virtue. Parents discovered this and protested, causing much trouble for the teachers of collectivism in our schools. They could not have this, so they created a "problem (The Hegelian Principle)," that of increasing child abuse and child sex abuse (a myth, since 80% of "reports" are "not sustainable" even according to their own figures) through many means, including "hot lines" where people could anonymously make "reports" of child abuse with no possibility of repercussions because the accused were barred from "confronting" their accusers, as promised in the United States Constitution (this fostered the lawyer's practice of advising clients to "report" child abuse against their opponents in any kind of legal action, to give their opposition something else to fight).

They further cemented this notion by passing a "Good Samaritan Law" to ensure that "accusers" were fully protected against legal repercussions. They could even keep the names of the accusers secret. In addition, they passed another law forcing people who worked with children regularly, such as doctors, nurses, counselors, and such to "report" any possibility of child abuse they came across in their work, on pain of career-ending sanctions if they don't. But the law is so subjective that even if they don't believe it themselves, they must "make a report," so they do. When they do, they give child services another opportunity to ruin the lives of another parent and teach another child or children that their parents have no power over them. They made another law allowing the federal government to pay local agencies "fees" at every juncture of the "system," making taking a child away from parents, on any pretext, financially advantageous for the agency, with the employees benefiting through bonuses, promotions (more money) and even special awards for them, based on the number of children they could "make available for adoption" by taking away their parental rights (the reason they don't get excited about abuse in foster care is there is no financial advantage for them in it. The child is already "in the system"). The laws under which they operate are so subjective that the individual social worker is able to define the law for themselves, allowing them to do things like viewing one dirty sock on the floor or a few dirty dishes in the sink as a "filthy house" and to thus testify in court.

They can, and do, use anything, even problems they themselves have created, against the parents (Such as breaking the family financially, then claiming they can't afford to keep the children). The "family courts," since they are "bought-and-paid-for," hearing exclusively cases involving minors, allow such "opinion" and "hearsay" testimony in deciding the guilt or innocence of the parent. In this manner, they are using the local child services to destroy parental authority over their children and what's taught them in school. Therefore if a parent objects to what his/her child is being taught in school, the child services can threaten them with "child abuse" charges and in this manner shut them up. They constantly demand more and more things of their victims, all of it costing the parents money and time. This drains their bank accounts and causes them to lose their jobs. Even people who used to be able to pay for their defense are reduced to pauperism, against an agency that has a "bottomless pit" of money to pay lawyers and "counselors." They constantly "double-dip," billing the victims for services for which they have already been reimbursed by the feds. When it's all over, win or lose, they bill the "victims" for "the cost of foster care." That's a little like the communist Chinese executing someone and then billing the family for the cost of the bullet. That's what this is all about, in a simple package.

Using Screwups as a "Fund Raiser"

2005-02-01T11:41:00.000-08:00

A child dies in "the system" or is abused or sexually abused in foster care (which is highly likely, according to their own figures) and it makes news. The child abus . . .uh, protectors are ready. They cry "not enough money" and "not enough people" and "case overload (which is the same thing)" and demand more money from the city, county, or state. Whoever is "investigating the situation, the governor, a committee, the mayor, or the child protectors themselves "buy it" because they have not been paying attention, and are (usually) not paying attention now. They give them more money so they can hire more people (or give themselves bonuses or promotions). A few "lower level" people (usually the only ones who really care, and have been "making waves") are disciplined or fired, sometimes even prosecuted ("falling on their swords" to protect the rest) Then the situation is forgotten and they go on as before . . . except for the child who has been traumatized or killed, that is. This is such a regularly-used scam that the only way anybody would not be aware of it is if he/she is not paying attention.

Ruining You Financially

2005-01-26T08:16:00.000-08:00

One of the child protectors' favorite scams is to ruin their victims financially. In one case, they took the children away "because the mother had to work too much, and that she really couldn't afford to raise these children." Then they demanded more and more money of this mother, and more and more of her time, causing her to lose her job. Then they used this problem they caused as additional cause to keep her children. As usual, they primarily target parents in the lower financial strata so they can't afford the high costs of fighting an agency that has a "bottomless pit" of money to use to hire lawyers and "specialists" to make it look like what they're doing is not extortion and kidnapping.

Retaliation!

2005-01-26T07:20:00.000-08:00

If you are an effective helper to one of the child protectors' "victims," you can count on having troubles of your own. It is a common practice for the child protectors to attack those who have the temerity to actually help those they "target" by finding something of which they can accuse the helper. It might be a "trumped up" child abuse or child sex abuse charge, or it might be something else entirely. If you're effectively helping their victims in any way, be alert. They'll be "coming after you." They tried to come after me when I was effectively helping my only remaining son to fight them off when they came after his two boys -- a fight we won, costing them $50,000more than they got from the feds. Suzanne Shell is an effective fighter for children and family rights and has been attacked many times, in many ways by the child protectors for it. She has been beaten and arrested on bogus charges many times and is, as this is written, fighting a bogus charge of Unlawful Practice of Law. I’ll keep you informed on the progress of the case. It's in Colorado Supreme Court as this is written. They'll come at you from the least expected angle, so be alert if you're fighting them effectively in any way. Make sure your own skirts are clean because they'll blow anything out of proportion in order to stop you and frighten off other people who would help their victims --much like the Islamic terrorists in Iraq are doing to keep Iraqis in "bondage" to Islamic Law.