Red Herring Alert

There's something fishy going on!

Florida Mom Julie Price Ordered by Judge to Shut her Blog and Stop Talking (Repost)

Yet another grieving mother was forced to stop talking, in an effort to mask the continuation of abuse in the Family Courts. This court order by a family court judge violating her constitutional right to Freedom of Speech, was in response to the Naples News highlighted the story of Julie Price.

The Naples News, in their story, told about alarming details from the court file and the felony child abuses charges being faced by her former husband in regards to hog tying Julies daughter to a bed, for which Jon Parrish admitted to.

Just like other courageous mothers all over the United States, Julie created a blog to expressing her right to freedom of speech. On August 4, 2011 the trial court of Judge Brodie told Julie to take down the blog. During the hearing, the judge was not concerned that the former Husband was non-compliant with court orders, and then admonished Julie for her blog, which only expressed her concern for the safety and well being of her daughters and how the “court appointed” experts were handling her case. These “experts” were named, causing alarm to the courts and their cronies, concerned about exposure to the illegal practices.

One wonders, when will justice prevail for Julie Price, her children and all of America’s children involved in the child-custody visitation scandal cases happening all over the US….”

Read Full Story: Florida Mom Julie Price Ordered by Judge to Shut her Blog and Stop Talking

Advertisements

Healthy Marriage~Responsible Fatherhood & Faith~Based Grants . . . We Know What the Game Is!

HMRF A

Let’s Get Honest! Blog

Absolutely Uncommon Analysis of Family –and “Conciliation” — Courts’ Operations, Practices, and History

Note To Readers: See New Page “Just HHS, Just Georgia, Just HMRF” grants

Publicizing my new pageHHS Grantees, Just Georgia, Just HMRF (CFDA 93086), May 13, 2016, Report Run. Take a look!  You will see it in the right sidebar, atop a list labeled “Vital Info/Links.” Scroll or “page-down” below a green-background rectangle of text (“Contributions Appreciated” section) to find “Vital Links.”

Also see this related (or, “what inspired it”) 5/12/2016 post:  Despite Truly Funky Tax Returns, HHS Remains Loyal (2010-2015) to One Faith-Based (under Two Diff’t EIN#s, ONE of which the IRS acknowledges#) in Stone Mountain–or is it Conyers?– Georgia

But first and FYI in the cream-colored, fine-print, maroon-bordered box right below, I also put a link to a “Congressional Research Service” (CRS) 12/11/2012 Report showing the Origins of HHS, certain Presidential Powers, and some Recent Developing Trends, and possibly already passed, House and Senate bills re-instituting those Presidential Powers (odd capitalization there deliberate).

Recommended Reading:  This CRS link, “Presidential Reorganization Authority, History, Recent Initiatives, and Options for Congress” (Henry B. Hogue, Dec. 11, 2012), has a Summary which explains a request to renew this authority was made January 2012 by President Obama, and explains how we got the “Federal Security Agency –>>  Health Education and Welfare ==> Health and Human Services  + (separately) Department of Education.

[An extended version of this box recurs below, while I talk some about the situation]…

I might start posting this link at the top of ALL posts until the message sinks in that existing federal agencies are in a state of constant transition, and sometimes re-organization, and we ought to get a basic read on where they came from — and in which direction they are now going.  For, example, does this direction EVER include reducing budgets based on having actually solved any problems they were set up to solve, or curtailing grants streams the grants streams were set up to resolve? And if not, does that not reflect (badly) on either the operation of, or perhaps even the original intentions of, those who pushed for the funding streams in the first place? (“Who” entails both individuals and corporate, often nonprofit “persons” run by certain individuals).

Or, are we going continue, as we do now, sponsoring an UNENDING stream of funding for the behavioral/mental health/social control categories** relating to the family court systems:

Batterer Intervention Programming seeking to further classify Batterer typologies, and simultaneously and opposing the concept that battering is actually “bad,” while attempting to behaviorally modify the batterers, AND, co-parenting coaching in an UNENDING stream attempting to change the behavior of the spouse or parent that protests battering, AND an Unending stream of grants encouraging teenagers to abstain from sex as a way out of poverty (using money diverted from funds that might otherwise more directly help their parents out of poverty, i.e., “TANF”) (“Abstinence Education”) AND so forth.[*as opposed to “medical research and development” or “curtailing the outbreak of contagious diseases” category under which the public health system originated..]

Thus, through these self-contradictory funding streams, the public is forced to separately fund under the banner of men’s rights (to their families, i.e., families as property rights), and women’s rights to not be assaulted or subjected to violence in the name of family (i.e., women, including mothers and the children they have given birth to NOT as an adjunct form of property owned by the men, including fathers), and the institutions (family courts) in which the staged custody battles take place, propped up in part (and — I do show this — the larger part) by Healthy Marriage/Responsible Fatherhood funding, and at that point NOT significantly protected by the Domestic Violence Prevention funding.

Meanwhile, as this built-in funding and “federal policy position” conflict facilitates generation after generation of children growing up witnessing abuse and experienced adults somewhat confused on whether or not it’s a crime, or a social disease, or the fault of their mothers’ or fathers’ lack of “communications skills,” obviously, there is from the USDOJ a Defending Children’s Initiative, plus Task force on Children Exposed to Violence.

Some of these children then, periodically, may run away, which then can be blamed on the mother and generate more criminal cases.  She can be hunted down, or they can be hunted down, at which point the Reunification Services can be ordered — a good deal, if you’re in that business.

The runaway children, and I’m talking now about those  running away from the abusive households to which the family courts “re-aligned” them under Promoting Healthy Marriage, Access and Visitation (etc.) at times MAY enter the foster care system (more HHS funding), OR, they may become runaway youth and end up, temporarily, in a transitional housing for youth shelter.  FYI, one of mine, shortly after reaching the age of majority and having apparently, outlived her fiscal and psychological utility for my “ex” (i.e., reducing significant child support arrears), the family court system (ordering more personnel — a GAL — into the mix, and engendering through poor decision-making, the “left-behind” parent’s [in my case, that was me, the mother] need to keep coming back to court hoping to regain contact with the separated children), which itself then “supports” the rationale to further streamline procedures, reduce legal protections to due process, based on “the courts are overloaded.”

Meanwhile, and I am still talking primarily HHS funding — the “smart ones” who may not necessarily have a strong overlap with the “honest” ones or those with a high personal sense of ethics regarding their own accountability, or understanding of the downside of diverting private nonprofits with private agenda — these “smart ones” (or, politically connected ones) — instead of choosing “just one of the above” can — and my Georgia-based page SHOWS (Excerpts below also validate in part) — are simply positioning themselves, AS ARE STATE AGENCIES, to say, “come through us, government — come to us, clients” and take Abstinence Education, Responsible Fatherhood/Healthy Marriage, AND Family Violence Prevention.

For a reminder (I did post on this in 2016), the “FVPSA” (Family Violence Prevention Services Act) dates back to 1984 and involves primarily the agency HHS.   By contrast, the Violence Against WOMEN Act, was in 1994, and is commonly associated in the public mind, and in general, with the USDOJ’s “Office of Violence Against Women” which exists to implement grants from that Act.  BUT, organizations are free to take from both the USDOJ and the USDHHS, as they are free to take from apparently equal and apparently opposing sides from the staged “gender wars.”

At a certain point, it’s time to call those in the game — at the highest levels, not the lowest levels– at this game, and let our Congressmen and women know that we know what is that game.

In order to do that, I recommend those approaching Congress not show up dumber-than-dirt on who is the HHS, what is “Presidential Reorganization Authority” historically, and a few things about 1996 PRWORA welfare reform as it pertains to HMRF funding as administered through HHS.

So, you might want to bookmark this link and get back to it, and you might want to also mark out some time to read my confrontational and, in general, NOT popular among the domestic violence groups OR protective mothers’ groups* BLOG.

*Why not?  After all, I am indeed a survivor of domestic violence, becoming through those court actions, a “protective mother,” and even though several years down the road, after it became clear that the family court would facilitate a state of ongoing disruption, minus enforceable safety boundaries from the same individual, until suddenly, and temperamentally, switching custody.  Right now, I just discovered leading feminist jumping in to promote the term “Mothers of Lost Children” (and her book) and the same professionals which I have documented, refused to seriously discuss the “HHS / HMRF” factor in between their laments about badly behaving judges, GALs, and custody evaluators.

I learned, over time, that to perpetuate any form of abuse — and economic control is essential to trapping people in abusive relationships, marital or other — the art of, pardon me, bullshitting the bystanders– is an essential part. They need to call it something else — like “Marriage” or “Family.”  There also have to be effective means, utilized at the same time,  of silencing future outcries (dissents), just in case, some bystanders might DO something about the abuse, and cut into the privilege — and profits– involved in exploiting other human beings in the name of some social benefit.

Recommended Reading:  This CRS link, “Presidential Reorganization Authority, History, Recent Initiatives, and Options for Congress” (Henry B. Hogue, Dec. 11, 2012), has a Summary which explains a request to renew this authority was made January 2012 by President Obama, and explains how we got the “Federal Security Agency –>>  Health Education and Welfare ==> Health and Human Services  + (separately) Department of Education.  It also explains the relationship of this particular authority to how forms of it were perpetuated under the Wartime Powers Act (for WWI and WWII) and that, among other things, such agencies as FEMA, the EPA and (as above) HEW were originally formed. This is a fairly neutral report, bipartisan, intended for members of Congress (CRS = Congressional Research Service) of the larger context of one of the largest grant making federal agencies, whose activities I continue report, particularly after learning how badly the policies compromised my personal family line, and kept them in danger, needlessly, for years, based on re-classifying “danger” from existing criminal definitions, to membership in a socially targeted as “dangerous” demographic group, i.e., single-mother=-headed households.


I do not know yet, whether Congress in 2012 did, in fact, reauthorize this “Reorganization Authority” but every thing I can see at the observational level is that a consolidation of federal DEPARTMENTS (HUD, HHS, etc.) programming is taking place under HHS programs targeted to HMRF funding — and the HMRF funding itself, along with funding to “Prevent Family Violence” — is also (at least in Georgia, this page shows) being centralized to go to just a very few organizations, with the former “Statewide Coalitions Against Domestic Violence” (CADV groups), themselves a symptom of centralized control of battered women’s shelters and services to help victims, are getting a small percentage of what the state agencies are getting.

Now, about that New Page, HHS Grantees, Just Georgia, Just HMRF (CFDA 93086), May 13, 2016, Report Run. Take a look!

That approximately 10,000 word PAGE (not post) is meant as an example, and a point of reference to how states are handling both the HMRF funding AND (as it turned out) the DV Funding, and just how centralized it is possible to become over time.  It currently is on top of my list of “Vital Links/Info” on the sidebar.

It is informative, and it does some detailed lookups on the very few grantees at this time, receiving straight CFDA 93086 grants.  As it turns out, some of these are also receiving the bulk of the “Family Violence Prevention/DISCRETIONARY” grants also, and as such have delivered coordinated control of that field over to the same agencies (and there are TWO referenced, which you will see, ONE of which also is handling the Healthy Marriage/Responsible Fatherhood grants).

Again, Title of the page:  HHS Grantees, Just Georgia, Just HMRF (CFDA 93086), May 13, 2016, Report Run. Take a look!

BY THE WAY — I could use some help looking up some of these corporations, from people willing to write-up and provide links to their efforts.  

Contact me through a comment if interested, but expect to make a time commitment if you’re serious about asking my time to again, review how to do this.  If this leads to other posts on this blog, that might also be good….

Why bother?

Well, it’s rewarding and enriching personally to SEE what is happening and there IS no better way to learn it than by starting to look at the evidence first-hand, and let that evidence speak to you.  Listening to the narratives of others who have looked it up and are talking about it, qualifies you as a second-hand witness, not an eye-witness.  Listening to others (including reading their accounts) is no real substitute for the real thing to get the “gray matter” working. It will raise some hard questions which, then, by even attempting to answer, will put anyone in a better position to understand more of current events in this country, including probably (especially, if you’re family-court-involved) in your life also.  There are all kinds of corollary benefits to following the money trail where public funds are involved. Understanding increases exponentially.

One of the hard questions that may come up should also include: “Why haven’t others — why haven’t “the experts” we’ve been reading advocating for Family Court Enhancement (or, Fixing), or about making family courts safe for children, or about stopping domestic violence, or about the issues of “parental alienation” either as a reality, or as an “unsound psychological theory” — talking about the same things Let’s Get Honest and just a few others, over many years, are talking about?

Ideally, if pursued, this might awaken one to the reality of how much national public policy is public relations-driven, i.e., the “Freud’s nephew factor” (Edward L. Bernays). This should then lead to a consideration of who controls the technology on which the media is based, which again, ought to lead RIGHT BACK to, “who owns this place, anyhow?” WHO controls it fiscally, WHO controls the operational infrastructure, and who controls most of the assets in the United States of America.

Continue Reading: https://familycourtmatters.wordpress.com/2016/05/17/note-to-readers-see-new-page-just-hhs-just-georgia-just-hmrf-grants/

Family Court Corruption – Bill Windsor of Lawless America and Carver County Minnesota Victims

Motion to Reconsider…Ever Retaining a Family Law Attorney

Family CourtWhen getting a divorce, the first thing most people do is contact a family law attorney, as they have been conditioned to believe that they actually NEED an attorney. It’s important to understand that if you retain a family law attorney, you will relinquish control over your life to a highly paid stranger that really doesn’t care what happens to you or your family.

Other perks you can expect when you join the family court club? Well, there’s the membership fees ($50-$100,000 for a contentious split).That amount doesn’t ensure that you will actually have the marital dissolution process completed. It just means that your finances, property and parenting time (if you have kids), will be completely chaotic.  Remember ladies and gentlemen…This is all about conflict for profit!

You can also expect lots of gaslightng. What’s that you ask? Gaslighting is a game of mind control and intimidation that is used as a way of controlling, confusing and debilitating someone. Your ex may engage in it, but the real gaslighting is done with the collusion of the court professionals. They will take any information you present and spin and twist it against you, as well as selectively omit facts and evidence that support your claims. This makes you doubt your own memory, perception and sanity. But remember – you’re not crazy…the systems are!!!

Let’s see, what else do you get in the FC Club? Oh yeah, divorce attorneys do file paperwork and negotiate agreements, just NOT FOR YOU! The swirls of paperwork will be given to you in file boxes which you can dig in frantically over the next 5, 10, 15 or 18 years you’ll be involved in the system if you have kids and it’s contentious. You will be required to collect numerous affidavits from co-workers, friends, family, doctors, teachers and anyone else involved in your children”s lives to prove that you’re a fit parent. You will also get to bring in the court ordered mental health professionals and services that will be a part of your life for years. Who are these “experts”? They include parenting consultants, parenting time expediters, parenting coordinators,custody evaluators, forensic psychologists, guardians-ad-litem, early neutral evaluations, child interviews,reunification therapists, uncoupling therapy and mediation to name just a few.

So what is this really all about??? 2 Word s- MONEY LAUNDDERING! Nothing more-nothing less!

Logo

An interdisciplinary and international association of professionals dedicated to improving the lives of children and families through the resolution of family conflict. (What they really mean is” dedicated to destroying the lives of children and families”)

Do You Know Your AFCC? YOU SHOULD!

Excerpts

“Completely omitted from this AFCC history is the very relevant fact that Meyer Elkin also co-founded in 1985, the leading fathers rights group-Children’s Rights Counci;. Study these people and their site carefully because it is the “blueprint” of how the courts are organized to rig cases for their paid-up allies. Nobody has to slip an envelope full of cash into the pocket of co-conspirators to rig court cases for these people. It is all done for them by the government. They get their bribes paid for them!

The AFCC claims their focus is on training judges, custody evaluators and mediators about custody and divorce issues. But in reality they are a father focused organization and promoting alienation theories to explain away family violence by men. In reality they act as a “clearinghouse” for organized case rigging.”

“Basic Judicial ethics prohibits judges from belonging to organizations with people who appear before them in the court cases. However, this doesn’t stop the crooked AFCC affiliated judges from appointing Guardian at Litem (child’s attorneys) or court psychological evaluators who are AFCC members to the same cases which the AFCC member judge is handling. Also the AFCC conducts joint conferences with the CRC – fathers rights group – usually on the subject of Parental Alienation – which they all know has been discredited as being not a valid method for use in court evaluations.”

Continue Reading: http://thetruthaboutthefamilycourt.blogspot.com/2010/01/do-you-know-your-afcc-you-should.html


The men and women I have met have been assaulted by ethical violations, legal abuses, betrayal and fraud and retainment of each of the legal professionals has only aggravated the problems they were employed to remedy.

And if you think you can ever hold these “professionals” accountable for their sins against you, guess again!

Nothing’s Changed in the Rigged Court Game

ID-100289357

Image Courtesy of Stuart Miles by FreeDigitalPhotos.Net

Twin Cities News Talk

Because Minnesota deserves the truth.  Posted Saturday, March 31st 2012

Radio Talk Show Host, Sue Jeffers, Minneapolis, MN – News Talk/AM 1130

Guests: Tim Kinley and Lea Banken On Air this Saturday, March 31st @ 1 pm, Judicial Accountability/Judicial Reform  

SueJeffers033112_1P_FamilyLaw

Further Historical Information on Minnesota Courts

Posted on September 6, 2012  Carver County Corruption

The Grim Truth About MN Chief Justice Lorie Skjerven Gildea

http://carvercountycorruption.com/2012/09/06/chief-justice-lorie-skjerven-gildea-up-for-re-election/

VOTE DAN GRIFFITH FOR MN SUPREME COURT

Chief Justice Lorie Skjerven Gildea is up for re-election this November 6th in Minnesota. Lorie Gildea received Banken mother’s  Writ of Prohibition (an emergency appeal) last August 2011. Gildea signed the paper denying Lea`s emergency appeal stating Lea had a remedy; a regular appeal that would take up to a year and thousands of dollars, of which time Lea would have no contact with her three young children. Lea filed her regular appeal and it has now been over a year since she has seen her children ages 2, 6 and 8. Lea`s case is still in appeal, no decision has been made.

Carver County`s Senator Juliane Ortman sent a letter to Chief Justice Lorie Gildea asking for an immediate investigation into Carver County Family Court practices back in April 2012. Link: ORTMAN LETTER Senator Ortman has been approached for years by citizens in Carver County about numerous family court horror stories where mothers lose custody of their children to wealthy ex-spouses with a history of abuse convictions. It is a pattern in this county no one can deny. Senator Ortman and Lea Dannewitz (previously known as Lea Banken) were interviewed by KARE 11 after the Ortman letter went out. Lorie Gildea got wind of the coverage by KARE 11 and sent a letter back to Senator Ortman immediately stating a full refusal to conduct an investigation. KARE 11 stopped the airing of the investigation for reasons unknown.

Lorie Gildea (incumbent) is up for re-election this November 6th. Gildea was appointed into office, not elected. Gildea is not a mother herself and is fully aware of the corruption in Minnesota`s judicial system. Gildea has allowed this corruption to continue. As a result hundreds of Minnesota parents, children and citizens suffer daily.

Every ballot in Minnesota this November will have a judicial section. Lorie Gildea`s opponent is Dan Griffith. Dan Griffith`s quest is to bring accountability back to the judicial system and ensure judges abide by laws and statutes that are enacted by the legislature and approved by the Governor. Currently, judges do not have to abide by the law – there is no remedy to hold them accountable.We have many readers contacting us and asking what they can do to help. Answer: get out to vote this November 6th. Vote Dan Griffith for Minnesota Supreme Court Justice and help us bring change to a very broken court system in Minnesota.


Minnesota Supreme Court race

As featured in JP Election Brief: The Supreme Court Special on October 18, 2012.

This year, there are three Minnesota Supreme Court seats up for election: Place 1, Place 4, and the Chief Justice seat. Only 2 of the 3 Supreme Court races were considered in the primary, the Chief Justice and Place 4 seats. In those races, three candidates competed for each seat and the two candidates receiving the most votes proceeded to the general election. In both of the primary races, the incumbent was successful.

In the race for the Chief Justice position, incumbent Justice Lorie Gildea and challenger Dan Griffith won the highest vote percentages and will compete against one another in the general election. In the race for Place 4, incumbent Justice David Stras and Tim Tingelstad will face one another in the general election.

Both incumbents received higher vote percentages in the primaries than their closest competitor. In their respective races, Gildea received approximately 50% of the vote to Griffith’s 29%, while Stras received approximately 49% of the votes to Tingelstad’s 29%, making it very likely that both incumbents will be re-elected.

Place 1 was not contested in the primary, but will see incumbent Barry Anderson compete against challenger Dean Barkley in the general election. Barkley previously served as a lobbyist and campaign manager for former governor Jesse Ventura and is a member of the Independence Party.

In all likelihood, all incumbents will be re-elected to their seats, maintaining the current state of the Minnesota Supreme Court.

Gee ya think?!!

Below are the results from the 2012 Election.

Supreme Court

Chief justice

Candidate Incumbency Place Primary Vote Election Vote
GriffithDan Griffith No Chief Justice 29.4%ApprovedA 39.59%   DefeatedD
ClarkJill Clark (Minnesota) No Chief Justice 21%
GildeaLorie Gildea   ApprovedA Yes 49.7%ApprovedA 60.0%   ApprovedA

Place 1

Candidate Incumbency Place Primary Vote Election Vote
AndersonBarry Anderson (Minnesota)   ApprovedA Yes Place 1 58.94%   ApprovedA
BarkleyDean Barkley No Place 1 40.65%   DefeatedD

Place 4

Candidate Incumbency Place Primary Vote Election Vote
NelsonAlan Nelson No Place 4 21.7%
StrasDavid Stras   ApprovedA Yes Place 4 48.8%ApprovedA 55.95%   ApprovedA
TingelstadTim Tingelstad No Place 4 29.4%ApprovedA 43.62%   Defeated

 

Family Court Whistleblower

YouTube-Family Court Whistleblower, Former Mediator Talks About Corruption


FORUM: Parental rights and wrong

– The Washington Times – Friday, April 25, 2008

 

After another tragedy of children being killed by their father in the context of high-conflict custody litigation, court professionals, fathers-rights’ leaders and others have been engaging in excuses including: inadequate evidentiary standards, or insufficient evidence or biases against mothers, to avoid blaming the courts

As the founder of the National Alliance for Family Court Justice (NAFCJ), the oldest grass-roots national group of protective mothers (since 1993) with a data bank of more than 1,500 intake callers, I know of many mothers with mishandled cases worse than that of Silver Spring’s Amy Castillo, except for the lethal ending. Her estranged husband is held in the drowning deaths of their three children in a Baltimore hotel.

Many mothers not only lost all custody rights but all visitation rights. Judges and court professionals routinely disregard and proactively work against mothers who make abuse complaints against fathers. Even the mother’s own attorney will tell her to keep her mouth shut because nobody want to hear about abuse.

Omitted from the debate are important factors:

(1) Widespread use in custody litigation of the discredited pro-incest/anti-mother Parental Alienation Syndrome (P.A.S.), a custody evaluation methodology that purports to identify manipulation by one parent against the other parent.

(2) Steering to judges who are cross-affiliated to fathers’ rights leaders, facilitated by a secretive judicial group.

(3) Organized case-rigging to ensure abuse complaints by mothers are discredited.

(4) Use of federal HHS-ACF (Health And Human Services Department — Administration For Children And Families — Access-Visitation) program funds, intended for parental counseling and resolving disputes but instead diverted to pay for pro-father custody evaluations.

Knowledge of this pattern has come from sources such as fathers’ rights literature, feedback from whistleblowers, documents mistakenly placed in court files, and threatening remarks by fathers demanding the mother agree to their litigation terms: (e.g., You better agree to joint custody, because the judge is on my side and will never rule in your favor).

Judges handling these pro-father rigged cases leave a trail of evidence — such as refusing to hear witnesses against the father as being prejudicial, then ruling against the mother on false grounds that she lied about the abuse because she had no witnesses to support her complaint while ignoring the fact the judge refused to listen to the witness or read submitted medical documents.

Other dishonest tactics include signing emergency ex-parte custody changing orders for the father on frivolous grounds, such as he ‘fears’ the mother will abduct the child — after she files an abuse complaint against him with CPS (Child Protective Services) or police.

The court never gives the targeted mother the required counter-hearing to rebut the father’s claim. Her child is summarily removed from her home by police for an abduction that did not occur, or wouldn’t have been a violation of any court order, law or prior agreement, even if she took the child on a short out-of-state trip. Many of the affected mothers don’t see their child again for years.

A good example is the D.C. case of Lillian Porter, who lost custody of her 2-year-old boy to the biological father on the dishonest grounds she was incarcerated after abducting him.

She never married or cohabited with this father, who hadn’t paid her child support and had pressured her with threats into signing an out-of-court joint custody agreement. He next proceeded to destroy her ability to work and pay for child-care by calling the DC government and have her benefits terminated by having his high income added as a factor. She moved to live with relatives in Arizona, but returned after he threatened abduction charges. Despite flying back to DC and turning the child over to him at the airport, he continued to pursue abduction and custody when she was incarcerated in the DC jail and not allowed to attend any of the court hearings. He claimed and got sole custody on grounds the child was with him and she was unable to care for the child because she was incarcerated.

Nobody cared that the father’s abduction and custody grounds were bogus and contradictory. Fortunately after some time, she got the case reversed and now has primary custody again, but this devious father continues to litigate on various frivolous points.

Fathers’ rights groups coach men on stalking, harassment and sabotage tactics. A whistleblower at one of their visitation centers quit in disgust and told about the pattern of set-ups against the mother. The fathers’ rights men working at the center tell a mother the visitation time had been changed or canceled by the father, then quickly go to court with the cheating father to get him an emergency ex-parte custody switch claiming the mother refused to bring the child(ren) at the appointed time.

This is not happening by chance. HHS-ACF family program grants are used for monetary incentives and kickbacks. Some mothers obtained written or taped evidence of the collusion between fathers and judges.

The founder of a judicial association by Los Angeles, Calif., family court judges, started in 1982, was also the founder of the leading fathers’ rights group, and the two groups are still heavily cross-affiliated. In Maryland, the Montgomery County Family Court’s evaluation unit is headed by a member of this judicial association along with leaders of the fathers’ rights group.

Many other courts and people all over the country in this group are involved in training custody evaluators and using the anti-mother PAS methodology against protective mothers to discredit abuse complaints against fathers.

Men and their co-conspiring court professionals are running custody mills to deliberately fuel high-conflict litigation to justify billings to HHS-ACF fatherhood programs intended to resolve these problems with nonlitigious counseling and mediation and not for paying custody evaluators and fathers attorneys. They are essentially running a litigation racketeering scheme funded by the federal government.

Shouldn’t we doing something about this, including congressional oversight investigations and in-depth discussions with HHS officials to stop these program misuses?

LIZ RICHARDS

National Alliance for Family Court Justice

NAFCJ.net


 

Are There Any Institutions We Can Trust?

“These crimes were unimaginable, and that they could’ve been countenanced and enabled by such an iconic institution, it gave us so much energy to pursue the story and get the story and make it public.” ~Walter Robinson, NPR, October 2015

“Spotlight” Movie Review

ID-10093828

Image by Stuart Miles @ FreeDigitalPhotos.net

I recently went to the film “Spotlight” which portrays the Boston Globe’s investigation and coverage of the Catholic Church sex abuse scandal. Their reporting and revelations won them the 2003 Pulitzer Prize and prompted admissions of similar abuse from victims around the world.

I assumed that this film wouldn’t get a lot of publicity as it exposes the cover-up of the pedophile priests by the court system, attorneys, media execs and the church; however, it just got 6 Oscar nominations.

Of course I had to research further to figure out the agenda behind wanting this movie to be seen by mainstream audiences.

What I discovered is that ‘Spotlight’ is more than likely being used as a propaganda piece to condition Americans into believing that the scandal is fully in the past and to forget the gravity of the Vatican crimes against humanity. The film shifts the focus away from the church and onto the feel good determination and heroism of the Boston Globe’s investigative journalists.

Many people are still in the dark that mainstream media is often biased and misleading and is used to influence the population toward an agenda set by “The Powers that Be”.

6 Corporations control 90% Of The Media in North America. It’s also rumored that the Vatican owns all news networks.

Another interesting find:
blockquotes-1The mainstream media won't tell you this, but the Boston Globe's reporting routinely 
minimized the critical role that secular psychologists played in the entire Catholic Church abuse
scandal. Time after time, trained "expert" psychologists around the country repeatedly insisted
to Church leaders that abusive priests were fit to return to ministry after receiving "treatment"under  their care. 

Indeed, one of the leading experts in the country recommended to the Archdiocese of Boston in 
both 1989 and 1990 that – despite Geoghan's two-decade record of abuse – it was both "reasonable and    therapeutic" to return Geoghan to active pastoral ministry including work "with children".            
TheMediaReport.com SPECIAL REPORT Fact Checker: Mainstream Media Promotes Hollywood’s ‘Spotlight’Movieand the Boston Globe’s Dishonest Reporting

This is much like the Family Court System which is designed to cover-up domestic violence and child abuse by changing the language, “It’s just a divorce and custody dispute” vs.”domestic violence and abuse”, which in the past would have been addressed in the criminal courts. In this system, parents are forced to work it out by bringing the mental health component into the court system via custody evaluators, parenting consultants, guardians-ad-litem, supervised visitation, foster care, and reunification therapy to name just a few. How is someone supposed figure out how to parent with someone that’s assaulting them? This is about control and profit by forcing consumption of therapeutic services designed to keep families stuck in the procedural confusion of the courts, while funneling private and tax payer dollars through court connected programs and corporate-collaborator government officials.

Top 5 HHS Programs Endangering Women and Children – Anne Stevenson Journalist, Policy Analyst~HuffingtonPost.com

Excerpts from: Before It’s News “The 3 City States that Control the Whole World”  

City of London – FINANCE                    Vatican City – RELIGION                                 Washington DC – MILITARY

The flag in Washington’s District of Columbia has 3 red stars, each symbolizing a city state within the three city empire. The three city empire consists of Washington D.C., London, and Vatican City. London is the corporate center of the three city states and controls the world economically. Washington’s District of Columbia city state is in charge of the military, and the Vatican offers spiritual guidance. The constitution of the district of Columbia operates under a tyrannical roman law known as lex fori, which in no way resembles the U.S. constitution.

The three sovereign, corporate “city states” are not part of the countries they are located in. They have their own laws, and identities, as indicated by their respective flags that clearly control the whole world.

Read More: http://beforeitsnews.com/politics/2013/05/the-3-city-states-that-control-the-whole-world-2-2517308.html?currentSplittedPage=1


Quotes from “Spotlight”

Michael Rezendes: This is not just Boston. This is the whole country, the whole world. They knew and they let it happen! It could’ve been you, it could’ve been me, it could’ve been any of us.

Marty Baron: The Boston priests molested kids in six different parishes over the last 30 years. The church found out about it and did nothing. 

Mitchell Garabedian: So, I pull out the 14 most-damning docs and I attach them to my motion and they prove everything, everything, about the church, about the bishops, about law.

Michael Rezendez: And it’s all public cause your motion to oppose Rogers motion is public.

Mitchell Garabedian: Yeah, exactly, now you’re paying attention.

Michael RezendesSo I could just walk into that courthouse right now and get those documents?
Mitchell Garabedian: No, you cannot, because the documents are not there.
Michael Rezendes: But you just said they’re public.
Mitchell Garabedian: I know I did but this is Boston and the church does not want them to be found so they are not there.
Michael Rezendes: Mitch, are you telling me that the Catholic Church removed legal documents from that courthouse?

Mitchell Garabedian: Look, I’m not crazy. I’m not paranoid. I’m experienced. Check the docket. You’ll see. They control everything.

 

Walter ‘Robby Robinson: We got two stories here: a story about degenerate clergy, and a story about a bunch

of lawyers turning child abuse into a cottage industry. Which story do you want us to write? Because we’re writing one of them.

 

 Mitchell Garabedian: “If it take a village to raise a child, it takes a village to abuse them.”

 

 


Image~minnesota.publicradio.org

Former St. Paul archbishop Nienstedt resigns Michigan post

Former Twin Cities archbishop’s arrival drew strong protests.
 By Star Tribune

Former St. Paul and Minneapolis Archbishop John Nienstedt quit a temporary post at a Michigan church Thursday, following a wave of protests from Catholic parents and abuse victim advocates.

Michigan residents opposing Nienstedt’s Jan. 6 assignment at St. Philip Catholic Church had bombarded their diocese and the media, and even pulled tuition support for a Catholic school associated with the church.

“I was surprised it took an outcry for them [church leaders] to make the right decisions,” said Samantha Pearl, a parent at St. Philip who was an outspoken critic of Nienstedt’s move to her parish. “I’m relieved.”

Advocates for clergy abuse victims also were taken aback by the swift departure of St. Paul’s former archbishop, who was scheduled to help out at the Battle Creek church for six months.

“This is a first in my lifetime: A grass-roots effort drove this man out of town,” said Bill McAlary, a Michigan leader of Survivors Network of Those Abused by Priests (SNAP). “It shows that if the people take action, we can clean up this mess.”

Continue Reading: http://www.startribune.com/former-st-paul-archbishop-nienstedt-resigns-michigan-post/366085421/


The bottom line is that there are still many people that are resistant to the higher truth that our institutions have been hijacked by fundamentally immoral thugs! People don’t want to admit that there is a systemic abuse of entrusted power for private gain and that our government does not keep us safe. This denial is how entire communities become complicit in allowing egregious crimes against humanity. When things are not going well, until you get the truth out on the table, no matter how ugly, you are not in a position to deal with it.  Bob Seelert, Chairman of Saatchi & Saatchi Worldwide (New York) 

“One of the saddest lessons of history is this: If we’ve been bamboozled long enough, we tend to reject any evidence of the bamboozle. We’re no longer interested in finding out the truth. The bamboozle has captured us. It’s simply too painful to acknowledge, even to ourselves, that we’ve been taken. Once you give a charlatan power over you, you almost never get it back.”
Carl Sagan, The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark

%d bloggers like this: