tagged w/ parent rights
-
Many studies conclude modern western women are less happy than women of earlier generations, or in cultures with less feminist influence. hese analyses overlook the delicate topic that modern women are not happy being feminist whores. Gender equality aside, feminism is about portraying all women as the abused, trafficked, prostituted, exploited victems of all men. Under feminism, all married women are exploited whores, as are all single women in relationships with men regarded victemized whores being exploited and raped. Feminism causes women to go around competing with each other as to how abused and exploited they are.. bragging about domestic violence, and how many abusive husbands they have divorced. RadFem abuse and rape stories are about 95% FALSE, so anytime we hear a RadFem talking about domestic violence, abuse or rape, we can be pretty darn sure we are listening to a whore making up lies. It sucks for the 5% or so real victems of abuse or rape, because they have to carry around pictures and police reports to prove that thier story is true, and that they are not just a lying whore playing the feminist game.
In a feminist world all our wives, girlfreinds, mothers, daughters, sisters. etc.. are all abused, exploited, trafficked whores and prostitutes. Women with virtue or integrity or fidelity are irrelevant. A feminist whore that wants a divorce so her ex hubby will be forced to pay her so she can have multiple sex partners, has exactly the same legal standing in 'no fault' divorce as a wife of exacting fidelity or one that really was abused, mistreated or abandoned. No fault divorce takes no account of which party breaks the marriage contract nor which one is harmed by the breach.
Feminist whores could make a decent wife, if there were fewer incentives to divorce. A lowdown hooker whore leaves the john when he stops paying for sex or after she robs him. Feminist divorce courts are a scam with judges/lawyers as the 'pimps' who side with the whores to spit the cash. A decent whorehouse has some reputation not rob customers, but the divorce court whorehouse has the opposite reputation, and whores expect to be able to spit anytime with all hubby's money, and use the pimp/judges to strongarm style force him to subsidize her future whoredom with alimony and child support,
It pretty much sucks being a feminist whore, but not as bad as it sucks being a man who marries one..
.. lol ...
(this article is written for entertainment purposes, and any similarities with your reality are intentional)Many studies conclude modern western women are less happy than women of earlier... more
-
-
The constitution and laws of the United States purportedly support marriage and parental rights, but in reality these precepts are undermined by whores of Radical Feminism that pervades our courts. "Whore" is a word that evolved from the prehistoric Germanic word 'hraz' meaning "one who desires" to the later christainized meaning "adulterer." The feminine of this, 'hrn', became 'hre' in Old English, the ancestor of Modern English word 'whore'. Modern meanings include: 1) A prostitute. 2) A person considered sexually promiscuous. 3) A person considered as having compromised principles for personal gain. Promiscuous was long defined as lewd conduct or any sex outside of marriage, a similar meaning exists today for sex outside of a committed relationship. Whoredom was frequently the basis or grounds for a divorce, in accordance with biblical precepts. A very strict definintion of whore would be any sex outside of marriage, thus all prostitutes are whores, but not all whores prostitutes. An exceedingly strict view of prostitute would only exempt married persons who avail themselves to thier spouse with no conditions or restrictions, as many relationships exist where sex is often playfully bartered as a reward for something, such as a gift, cash, or mowing the lawn.. a practice even within marriage.
No fault divorce ignores grounds for divorce, so a woman seeking divorce for the desire to have sex outside of marriage (whoredom) has the same legal standing as an abandoned loyal, faithfu,l wife, or a woman who was abused, neglected or mistreated in a marriage. No fault divorce takes no account of which party violated the marriage contract, nor which party was injured by the breech of marriage contract. Radical feminism proclaims all women are the abused, exploited, coerced victims of all men, and in so doing has reduced all women to the status of trafficked whores and prostitutes, which is essentially the Radical Feminist definition of marriage. Radical Feminism diseminates propaganda to target and villify all men as abusers, with women a privildged victim class with special rights and benefits. This is exactly the same propaganda used by the Woman's Klan to justify slavery and often violent discrimination of blacks, who were portrayed as irresponsible, aggessive, hostile beasts, who basically needed to be beat down to protect 'white womanhood'.
The book Whores of the Court: The Fraud of Psychiatric Testimony and the Rape of American Justice, was written by MARGARET HAGEN, PhD. She is an expert in this field, and teaches Psychology, Criminal Justice and Forensic Psychology at Boston University. Her book provides an excellent analysis of venal ’whores’, usually feminists, who work for the courts and provide biased, fabricated, and false testimony.
Many family courts consist of layers of lawyers, judges, therapists, counseling, visit centers and other venal whores who's livihood is spewing radical feminist ideology that advocates divorce and single parent motherhood as preferable to marriage, paternity, shared parenting, or fatherhood as it is alleged by our laws. In effect, whoremongering courts may easily reverse the intent and meaning of laws purporting to support marriage and fatherhood, by merely trotting out their favored whores, who provide biased, lewd , vulgar or unsupported testimony in favor of maternal custody over shared parenting. Child Custody, is the main determinant to the distribution of marital assets, the house, and the future income of both parents. Feminist whores consistently advocate sole or majority of custody to women, because this outcome results in financial benefits to the mothers, and funding to the other whores, whoremongers and thier feminist programs.The constitution and laws of the United States purportedly support marriage and... more
-
-
Marriage represents a substantial risk to men. Investing in a family is likely the most substantial investment of time and effort a man can make. Women typically 'win' no-fault divorces, and walk away with everything including the house, the marital savings, the car, the children, and even his future earnings. Men prudently view marriage as a unilateral debt obligation that women may 'cash in' at any time, and leave men broke and distressed over the loss of children. Accumulation of marital assets such as home equity could be viewed as detrimental as it provides incentives for the wife to divorce. Renting, secret acounts, or concealment of finances may be viewed as a financial hedging strategy for divorce risk.
The decision to be a single custodial parent is largely a financial choice made by women who perceive a benefit from filing a divorce or declining a marriage. Marriage represents risk uncertainty to women, while government programs (Child Support Collections, ADF, etc) are a sure thing. The security of government programs is more attractive than the uncertainty of getting or staying married, they are a government divorce incentive system. In some jurisdictions, 80% or more of divorces are filed by women. This is opposite to feminist propaganda that portrays typical divorces as a 1950's era phenomenon of the husband running off with the cute young secretary. Women are divorcing to secure financial benefits for themselves. The U.S.C.B. reports (Pub. P60-230) that 83.1% of sole custodial parents are female, and this knowedge is the assurance to women that she can file with high confidence in the outcome. The divorce incentive system works for women because the expectation of winning most or sole custody.Marriage represents a substantial risk to men. Investing in a family is likely the... more
-
-
A rational analysis of the child support issue is more helpful in explaining the child support problem. Page 40 of The Law and Economics of Child Support Payments By William S. Comanor addresses the phenomenon of the 'Deadbeat Dad' starting with the well known example of the 'baby momma' on welfare scenerio, showing that since dads pay money to the state, and AFDC pays the mother there simply is no incentives for fathers to pay support thru the system, because every $1 paid contributes $0 additional benefit to the child, and only payments 'under the table' directly to the mother or child have any real benefit to the child.
The growing popularity of the concept of 'Child Support Civil Disobedience' reaches a similar conclusion. Many NCP's argue that all parents should and do have a responsibility to care for thier child, but that making these payments thru the state is the least responsible course of action, because doing so funds a corrupt and evil machine that feeds off of the destruction of families, and keeping parents away from thier children. This argument further holds that the only 'real' support a NCP gives a child is the time and money actually spent with, and on a child. In other words, the forced 'child support payment' to the state is viewed as having no benefit to the child, while 'direct' payments such as time and money spent durring 'visits', going on outings, buying the child clothing, schools supplies, etc.. is viewed as the only 'real' means to satisify a parent's moral obligation to support thier child.
The book by Comanor explains the 'Child Support Civil Disobedience' phenomenon thru an analysis of the difference between individual and collective consumption preferences. In a marriage, many 'collective' economic decisions are made by parents, which reflect not only the individual preference of each parent, but each parents concern for the 'collective' preferences of the household. Likewise, the amount each parent allocates to spend on the child is likewise dependant upon collective resources. The problem with child support payments is that it raises the income of the custdial parent, thus raising the consumption preference of that parent, so that only a portion of the NCP's child support payment is now allocated to the child. So, like in the welfare 'baby momma' scenerio, each $1 dollar of NCP support payment is no longer $1 going to the child, but rather a fraction gets apportioned to the child, with the remainder enhancing the consumption of the CP due to the increase income caused by the support payment. So the NCP views 'off the books' support payments as a dollar for dollar contribution to the child, while forced state run 'child support payments' are viewed as contributing little or nothing to the child.
In the case of a high conflict divorce, reasonable parents may conclude that none of thier 'child support payments' does anything at all to support thier child. The all Street Journal published a recent study showing the average legal fees for divorce to be about $78,000. In other words a $500/month child support payment by the NCP to the CP would take 13 years to payoff typical legal fees needed to 'win' the custody battle and resulting child support payment. Thus $1 of 'lawyer support' payment goes to creating the non-custodial parent = $0 benefit to the child. Considering these facts, the idea of 'Lawyer Support' civil disobedience has a much nicer ring to it.
The cost of typical custody dispute legal fees is also about the cost of sending a child to a decent college for 4 years, and for most parents it is not merely consumption 'preferences' but income restrictions that lead many parents to avoid making payments to the state or the CP. Legal fees change the consumption preferences and ability of parents and reduce expenditure on children accordingly.A rational analysis of the child support issue is more helpful in explaining the child... more
-
-
couple who had their children taken away from them for two years after falsely being accused of sexual abuse have been awarded a six-figure compensation payout.
Tim and Gina Williams went through a 'total nightmare' of having their three young children placed in separate foster homes after being wrongly placed under suspicion by social workers.couple who had their children taken away from them for two years after falsely being... more
-
-
The advantage of being a custodial parent instead of noncustodial is largely a financial one by women who perceive a benefit from filing a divorce or declining a marriage proposal.
Marriage represents uncertainty for women "for better or worse", while government programs (from CS collection to EITC, etc) are a sure thing. In uncertain economic times, particlarly among people near the bottom of the economic spectrum, the security of these government programs is more attractive than the uncertainty of getting or staying married - they become a government divorce incentive system.
For men, Marriage represents a substantial risk of losing savings or investment into a marriage. Investing in a family is likely the most substantial investment of time and effort a man can make. Knowing that women typically 'win' no fault divorces, and walk away with
virutally everything including the house, the marital savings, the car, the children, and even his future earnings... men prudently view marriage as a sort of unilateral debt obligation that women may 'cash in' at any time, and leave them financially destitute and in emotional distress over the loss of thier children.
The divorce incentive system works for women because the expectation of winning most or sole custody. In other words, it must be known that the no-fault divorce petition will probably be interpreted as a demand to exclude the other (defendant) parent from the family. This is 100% opposite to a request upon the judge for permission to leave the family, as divorces are often portrayed.
Margaret F. Brinig, in "These Boots Are Made For Walking: Why Most Divorce Filers Are Women", describes "expectation of sole custody" and its effect on divorce filing decisions. This report has been criticized as biased, for example it presumes all reports of 'cruelty' made in a divorce are true, and that all courts are 'fair' or just in terms of allocating custody. It does provide some fairly reasonable conclusions:
"Our results are consistent with our hypothesis that filing behavior is driven by self-interest at the time of divorce..... We have found that who gets the children is by far the most important component in deciding who files for divorce, particularly when there is little quarrel about property, as when the separation is long. .... Because the custody coefficients were the largest by far, family law reformers may want to concentrate on formulating custody rules that will alter the spouses’ relative gains from marriage."
In some jurisdictions, 80% or more of divorces are filed by women. Women aren't choosing to deliberately sabotage their economic health, they are securing benefits for themselves and their children. The U.S.C.B. reports (Pub. P60-230) that 83.1% of sole custodial parents are female, and this knowedge is the assurance to a female plaintiff that she can file with almost 85% confidence in the outcome.The advantage of being a custodial parent instead of noncustodial is largely a... more
-
-
Revelation 13
Anyone with ears to hear
should listen and understand.
Anyone who is destined for prison
will be taken to prison.
Anyone destined to die by the sword
will die by the sword.
...17 And no one could buy or sell anything without that mark, which was either the name of the beast or the number representing his name.
18 Wisdom is needed here. Let the one with understanding solve the meaning of the number of the beast, for it is the number of a man. His number is 666
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=REV+13-14;REV+18;&version=51;
This revelation can be viewed as a prophesy or vision or warning of a time when the Beast controls mankind, by controling thier ability to buy, sell, work, travel, etc, and the use of a mark, or number to track people, and it warns us that being alert to the number 666 can help us solve the mystery of the Beast. Forget for a moment interpretations that focuses on 666 as the mark on men, but instead consider 666 literally in Rev 13:18 as the number of the beast.
We now exist under control by a Beast, known by the number 666.
42 USC 666 uses the pretext of cracking down on deadbeat dads; to implement a national system requiring State and Federal agencies to locate absent parents anywhere across the country to extract unpaid child support payments. A parent who falls behind on payments will have their real property encumbered, bank accounts seized, wages garnished, tax refunds intercepted, and all occupational and business licenses either suspended or withheld. Furthermore, courts may impute income well above the abilty to pay, thus ensuring the non-compliance of a parent, and thus swift criminalization under 42 USC 666. In effect, this empowers the beast, under 42 USC 666 to financially control parents, very similar to the concept of controling the ability to buy and sell; expressed some 2000 years ago in Rev 13:16. Submission of other parents is extorted by fear of becoming the next target of the Beast.
The Lord, through the biblical prophet Jeremiah, explained the conditional nature of prophecy:
At what instant I shall speak concerning a nation, and concerning a kingdom, to pluck up, and to pull down, and to destroy it; If that nation, against whom I have pronounced, turn from their evil, I will repent of the evil that I thought to do unto them. And at what instant I shall speak concerning a nation, and concerning a kingdom, to build and to plant it; If it do evil in my sight, that it obey not my voice, then I will repent of the good, wherewith I said I would benefit them. (Jeremiah 18:7-10)1
We could regard tracking numbers such as driver licenses, social security numbers, or maybe even the label or stigma of being non-custodial parent as the mark which parents must carry that allows the beast to control them. Would anyone argue that it is virtually impossible today to thrive in modern society without social security and other numbers, and that 44 USC 666 targets and enlsaves non custodial parents, and empowers the state to sieze virtually everything, and utterly destroy a parent under the rule?Revelation 13
Anyone with ears to hear
should listen and understand.... more
-
-
Most cities on earth are blighted by fatherless matriarchal ghettos of crime, violence, poverty, disease, drop outs, prisoners, and drug addics, and more sadly government programs based upon ideology of feminists and women's studies only make the problem worse. Solving the problems of societies ills will begin with healing and strengthening the family, which must begin with restoring the rights of fathers to be a part of the family, no less than the rights of women to participate in the world of business.
Fred
www.f4jfl.comMost cities on earth are blighted by fatherless matriarchal ghettos of crime,... more
-
-
On this 16th Day of December 1773, Patriots and rabble rousers in the New England Colonies stood together in disobedience that famously forced a reassessment of society's moral parameters that would spark the creation of this great nation, and change the course of world civiliization.
When we consider our duty to Civil Disobedience, it hinges on a distinction between an "unjust law" and an "illegitimate government." Plato suggested those who broke an unjust law had to accept punishment as part of the bargain. However, when an entire government is illegitimate and unjust, preserving public order, and acceptance of punishment, need not apply to civil disobedience.
John Locke, an elightened inspiration of the first American Revolution, said that force may be used to oppose even the highest magistrates if they themselves are lawbreakers:
"Wherever law ends, tyranny begins [...] and whoever in authority exceeds the power given to him by the law, and makes use of the force he has under his command [...] upon the subject which the law allows not, ceases in that to be a magistrate, and acting without authority, may be opposed as any other man who by force invades the right of another. And why this should not hold in the highest, as well as in the most inferior magistrate, I would gladly be informed." "May the commands then of a prince be opposed? [...] Force is to be opposed to nothing but to unjust and unlawful force.
"
"Revolutions happen not upon every little mismanagement in public affairs [...] many wrong and inconvenient laws will born by the people without mutiny [...] But if a long train of abuses, prevarications, and artifices, all tending the same way, make the design visible to the people, it is not to be wondered, that they should then rouse themselves.
"
Is this not the distinction between a lawful government having unjust laws and an illegitimate government? More recent scholarship has upheld this distinction between civil disobedience and what could be called "militant" action:
"Civil disobedience [...] is clearly distinct from militant action [...] the militant does not accept [the existing political system] as one which is nearly just or reasonably so, he believes [...] that it departs widely from its professed principles [...] While his action is conscientious in its own terms, he does not appeal to the sense of justice of the majority (or those having effective political power). Instead he seeks by well-framed militant acts of disruption or resistance [...] to force a movement in the desired direction. Thus the militant may try to avoid the penalty [...] [since this would] express a recognition of the legitimacy of the constitution to which he is opposed. [...] Now in certain circumstances militant action and other kinds of resistance are surely justified.
" [1] John Rawls, A Theory of Justice
Consider the government edict: "The Reichsgericht itself refused to recognize Jews living in Germany as persons in the legal sense" Supreme Court of Germany (1936), per Ernst Fraenkel, German legal scholar. Now consider how the family courts routinely and arbitrarily pick and chose one parent to have 'legal rights' as a parent. Hitler's rise to power was completely legal [2], but many consider the Nazi government illegitimate because the Nazi's denied legal protection to entire classes of human beings. In this regard there no moral distinction between their policies and our own government's policy toward non-custodial parents. Do parents engaging in civil disobedience owe a duty of self-surrender to such a government? The answer must be no.
If there be Patriots about, Please take time to comemorate the Boston Tea Party on this December 16.
Fred Schuler
www.f4jfl.comOn this 16th Day of December 1773, Patriots and rabble rousers in the New England... more
-
-
There is no other field of law ridden with more corruption than Family court. Judicial Corruption is as routine and rampant and resiliant to reform as is the infamous corruption found in the Courthouses and Politics of Chicago.
This story revisits the epic FBI investigation of Judicial Corruption in Chicago decades ago, in which hundreds were convicted or lost thier jobs. Sadly, today, that same corruption continues to be entrenched in political and judicial activities.
"Corruption and graft have become so entrenched over the decades that they've become part of the political culture, and experts cite a list of reasons why: Weak state campaign finance laws that have allowed influence peddlers to make big contributions. Lawmakers who don't always get close scrutiny. A patronage system that makes employees beholden to political bosses. And a jaded public that seems to accept chicanery as the cost of doing business."There is no other field of law ridden with more corruption than Family court. Judicial... more
-
-
20-2-2275 Smith v. Smith, Law. Div.–Hudson Cy. (Gallipoli, A.J.S.C.) (13 pp.) Plaintiff commenced this suit against his former wife and her parents, alleging intentional infliction of emotional distress and negligent infliction of emotional distress, as a result of defendants taking actions to alienate plaintiff from the couple’s children. Defendants claim that plaintiff’s action is for alienation of affections, a cause of action abolished by the “Heart Balm Act,” and should be dismissed for failure to state a claim. The court found that because plaintiff alleged that defendants’ alienating behavior caused him emotional distress, the predicate claim is not alienation of affections but emotional distress.
http://www.law.com/jsp/nj/PubArticleNJ.jsp?id=120242657325220-2-2275 Smith v. Smith, Law. Div.–Hudson Cy. (Gallipoli, A.J.S.C.) (13 pp.)... more
-
-
Page 40 of The Law and Economics of Child Support Payments By William S. Comanor addresses the phenomenon of the 'Deadbeat Dad'; starting with a welfare scenerio, showing that since dads pay money to the state, and AFDC pays the mother there simply is no incentives for fathers to pay support thru the system, because $1 paid to the state provides $0 benefit to the child, and only payments under the table directly to the mother or child have any real benefit to the child.
Many non custodial parents [NCP] argue that all parents have a responsibility to care for thier child, but that making these payments thru the state is the least responsible course of action, because the only real support a NCP gives a child is the time and money actually spent with, and directly on a child.
The book by Comanor explains Child Support Civil Disobedience for higher income levels thru an analysis of the difference between individual and collective consumption preferences. Child support payments raises the income of the custodial [CP] parent thus raising the individual consumption preference of that parent, so that only a portion of the Non Custodial Parent's child support payment is now allocated to the child. So, like in the welfare baby moma scenerio, the $1 dollar of NCP pays in support payment is no longer $1 going to the child, but rather a fraction gets apportioned to the child, with the remainder enhancing the consumption of the CP due. The NCP views 'under the table' and 'off the books' support payments as a dollar for dollar contribution to the child, while forced state child support schemes are viewed as contributing little or nothing to the child.
Often a CP must enroll a child in daycare, hire a babysitter or other activity after divorce, to replace the child caring role of the NCP previosly held in the marriage. In this scenerio litigations ensue to minimize NCP contact in order to maximize the child support payments to the CP, which do nothing to benefit the child. but simply transfer both the income and the role of the NCP to a third party, often against the wishes and preferences of the NCP. When a NCP shares in the care of a child, he may have preferences to care for the child say 50 hours a month, and spend say $500 a month on the child, and the child directly benefits $500 and quality parent involvment. When forced out of the family by the state, the $500 a month support payment paid by the NCP may only pay for the 50 hours of supervision at say $10/hr, and while the NCP 'out of pocket' expense is still $500, the child recieves $0 benefit from this transfer and both the chilld and NCP are denied other benefits of care and companionship.
In the case of a high conflict divorce at higher income levels, reasonable parents may conclude that $0 of thier child support payments does anything to support thier child, and it is just another name for payment directly to the corrupt court that is paid to remove the NCP from thier children. The Wall Street Journal published a recent study showing the average legal fees for divorce to be about $78,000. In other words a $500/month child support payment by the NCP to the CP would take 13 years to payoff typical legal fees needed to win the custody battle and resulting child support payment. Thus, $0 dollar benefiting the child compared to an alternative resolution without legal fees leaves that amount to benefit the child. Parents may simply view the forced orders for custody payments as Lawyer Support; and Lawyer Support Civil Disobedience has a much nicer ring to it. Corruption across Family courts could be easily measured by comparing data on legal fees, child support amounts, and allocation of parenting time... if the courts were not so corrupt and made this information readily available for analysis.Page 40 of The Law and Economics of Child Support Payments By William S. Comanor... more
-
-
PRESIDENT OBAMA'S 'RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD' BILL, is likely to be passed soon after inauguration. Father's rights advocates should take special note of the following aspects of this bill, and be professionally prepared to apply for funding for research and programs related to 'Responsible Fatherhood'.
Just as feminsts, NOW and 'women's studies' graduates have been well funded for decades to promote programs for women and mothers, we in the fathers rights movement must be prepared to step up to the plate to promote programs for men and fathers. It would be very sad if Obama's Fatherhood plan lacked any real substance and diversity but instead failed to include Father's Rights advocates at the table, and only continued the hollow male bashing of typical feminst demgoguery such as the bloated and over funded VAWA which may be one of the greatest causes of fatherless in our society today.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
Congress makes the following findings:
(1) The most important factor in a child's upbringing is whether the child is brought up in a loving, healthy, supportive environment.
(2) Children who grow up with two parents are, on average, more likely than their peers in single-parent homes to finish high school and be economically self-sufficient.
(3) Father-child interaction, like mother-child interaction, has been shown to promote the positive physical, social, emotional, and mental development of children.
SEC. 107. STATE ASSESSMENTS OF BARRIERS TO EMPLOYMENT AND FINANCIAL SUPPORT OF CHILDREN.
(a) State Assessments and Reports- As a condition of the continued approval of a State plan under part D of title IV of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 651 et seq.), each State with an approved such plan, acting through the appropriate State agencies, shall assess the State policies with respect to the issues described in subsection (b) and submit a report to the Secretary of Health and Human Services on the results of such assessment not later than March 15, 2008.
(b) (5) Identification of any other barriers to healthy family formation or sustainable economic opportunity for custodial and noncustodial parents that are created or exacerbated by Federal or State laws, policies, or procedures, including an examination of the rules of Federal and State means-tested programs, the operation of the State workforce system, the availability of financial education services...
(c) Grants to States for Commissions on State Law Improvements in the Best Interest of Children and Families- The Secretary of Health and Human Services shall award grants to States to establish or support commissions to review the State assessment conducted in accordance with subsection (a) and to make recommendations on ways to improve State law in the best interest of children and families.PRESIDENT OBAMA'S 'RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD' BILL, is likely to be passed... more
-
-
National Fatherhood Initiative Research
National Fatherhood Initiative conducts research on fatherhood-related topics and on marriage In addition to evaluations on the effectiveness of programs.
The Publication One Hundred Billion Dollar Man: The Annual Public Costs of Father Absence, shows how the federal government spends $99.8 billion dollars every year on programs - such as child support enforcement and anti-poverty efforts - that support father-absent homes.National Fatherhood Initiative Research
National Fatherhood Initiative conducts... more
-
-
When county courts or other agents of the state violate a parent's constitutional right to care and companionship of thier own child, they frequently commit 42 USC 1983 color of law violactions and other crimes, that in totality, meet the criteria for RICO act civil relief. When corrupt, incompetant courts, lawyers, quacks and other 'service providers' conspire to drag out sham litigations, and create non-custodial parents to fuel the gravy train of funding that follows, extortion of parents and wire fraud of federal funds intended to help children and families is also involved. Matching federal funds for collection of child support payments is also typically wire fraud, as well as the deluge of funds for each case, hearing, placement, adoption, visitation or other bogus 'service' billed, since these expsensive activities do nothing to help children or parents, as these programs were intended, but only to enrich feindish lawyers and other 'providers' that use these services like weapons to further legal harassment and deliberate infliction of emotional distress on parents and children. The state is the most prolific abuser of children on the planet, especially by parental alienation thru hideous programs invented by cronies of corrupt courts busily thieving money. Since these hordes of scoundrals derive thier income from the trading of children, and snatching them from fit parents, it can also be viewed as a crime of human trafficking. Corrupt child custody proceedings often include kidnapping, extortion, perjury, false or altered documents, alterted court transcripts and recordings, witness harassment, witness tampering, and all forms of unethical and unprofessional conduct by quack witnesses, lawyers, and judges alike.When county courts or other agents of the state violate a parent's constitutional... more
-
-
The story tagged to this posting is about an army unit in Columbia, who needed to produce rebel 'kills'. The soldiers needed 'kills' in order to get leave, vacation days off. The officers needed 'kills' for promotions and performance reviews. So they routinely lured civilians
to the base, killed them, and called them 'Rebels'. This was discovered when the brother of a soldier was killed, despite protests.
In the United States an 'army' of workers in the domestic violence and abuse industry does much the same thing, and often fabricates false accusations or 'lures' parents in
custody disputes to make false accusations, in order to bring up the numbers needed to get thier funding, promotions, etc..
There are many studies that address the problems of false abuse and domestic violence accusations in the context of divorce and custody disputes, such as:
http://www.liftingtheveil.org/reports2.htm
Many of these studies fail to include analysis of another very basic motivation
behind false accusations of domestic violence and abuse in the context
of custody: the money. The falsely 'accusing' parent usually profits from false
accusations in the form of more custody, more child support,
vindictive gratification of using the courts like a club to attack the
other parent and 'win' the custody battle. The lawyers also
clearly 'win' lots of money from the extortion racket threatening both
parents thier kids will be taken away unless they pay thru the nose for
more and more legal fees. In reality, there is an entire 'army' of
corrupt conspirators in the 'abuse' industry that simply must generate
abuse and domestic violence numbers in order to survive. Imagine what
would happen to all the shelters, and quacks, and experts and case
workers who's income depends upon domestic violence and abuse, if
no 'real' cases could be found? would they simply sit at thier desks
twidling thier thumbs?
Parents and children are nothing but 'meat' for the butchers in the
corrupt family court racket seeking to maximize thier own best interest
by exploiting children and targeting parents with false domestic
violence and abuse accusations.
The logical solution to this problem would be to end all funding
schemes that are based on quantity of abuse or domestic violence
reports, to reduce the incentive to produce bogus reports. A more
simple neutral funding scheme, such as basing funding for abuse
prevention programs on a simple population headcount would be
preferable. A 'progessive' funding scheme would reward communities with
programs in place successful at preventing abuse and domestic violence.The story tagged to this posting is about an army unit in Columbia, who needed to... more
-
-
The legal system in the USA is the 'Big Lie' of our generation, a lie that is so big, and so terrible, and so horrible that most can not, or will not attempt to 'get thier heads around it' or face the cold hard reality that the legal system in our country is a fundamentally corrupt racketeering fraud, which is orchestrated by corrupt judges, and serves to enrich armies of unethical lawyers and other fiendish ghouls. Fools that stumble around America in a delusional stupor that this nation is still a democracy, that rule of law exists, and that justice and integrity can be expected from our courts or our political leadership are Living the Big Lie.
The fact that the police state may steal your children at any time, for the most frivilous, false or fabricated reason is too horrible for most people to imagine, so they simply prefer to believe the 'Big Lie' that the courts act in the 'best interests' of children. In reality, the courts and other agents of the state are the most prolific child abusers on the planet, and the alienation of children from a parent, and severing parental attachments in young children are some of the most terrible forms of child abuse that causes lifetimes of misery for children, parents and other family members. Corrupt courts and thier fiendish cronies grow fat from collecting government incentives to shred families and steal children, and in the process destroy parents and children financially, emotionally, and often physically.
There may be some law abiding citizens who realize that the courts and legal system are corrupt, but choose to justify this in thier mind with the feeble belief that it only happens to those "other" people, you know, the kind that have problems with the law.. etc.. Little do these sheople know that the absolute corruption of the courts has NOW reached advanced levels that no one, and no group, immune to attacks and destruction that corrupt courts rountinely inflict upon parents and children.
We have all heard the old story about Germans who did not care or say anything when the NAZI's came for the jews, or the gays, or the gyspies, or those who spoke up and spoke out, they did not care, because 'they' were not one of 'us' they explained... until the time came when the NAZI's came for them, or thier nieghbors, or thier family, and by that time there was no one left to speak up or to ask for help. We parents have reached that time, it's our turn now, we are now the ones who now stand before the butchers, and like so many that have come before us, we plead for justice and mercy and to return our children. But the corrupt and oppressive and tyranical courts now routinely attack and destroy fit law abiding parents, and steal our children, and bankrupt us with sham litigations that should be reserved for the most henious of crimes.
In the eyes of corrupt courts there is no difference between families, children, parents and criminals ... all are kindling for thier destrutive fire of injustice, fraud and evil conspriacies to profit from stealing children from thier parents. The family courts are a fire kept blazing by dragging as many innocent children and parents into the inferno as possible, to serve as fuel for the corruption of the courts and lawyers that feed off the carnage.
The legal system in the USA is the 'Big Lie' of our generation, a lie that... more
-
-
We now live under Kleptocracy , Autocracy, Beauracracy, and Idiocracy.
'Autocracy' is a form of government by dictorships or oligarchies with excessive control, manipulation, propaganda and is well illustrated by George Orwell's book '1984'. If you do not have a basic understanding of that book, this blog won't make much sense. If you do understand '1984' then you should be able to easily find the connections with propaganda relating to the current wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, which replaced the 1990's era 'war on drugs', which followed the 'Cold War' era which ended in the 1980's, begging the question why our propaganda driven society seems focused on the perpetuation of a constant state of war, as if our nation would become unfrayed by peace.
Parents face a similar version of autocratic tyranny in the form of flippant government intrusion into the care and custody of our children. The corrupt and incompetant family courts distort thier destruction of the family, by rewarding and fueling high conflict custody litigations and sole custody decisions is somehow in the 'best interests' of the child, when in reality all they are doing is pilaging the family's savings, harming the child's future, and engaging in the deliberate, methodical emotional abuse of the child, thru parental aleination, violent parental detachment, and other means.
Pournelle's Iron Law of Bureaucracy states that in any bureaucratic organization there will be two kinds of people: those who work to further the actual goals of the organization, and those who work for the organization itself and in all cases, the second type of person will always gain control of the organization, and will always write the rules under which the organization functions.
Thus we see the natural progession of child care in a Bureaaucratic process will seize control from those seeking to help children, ie: parents, to give power and control to those seeking to enhance the beaucracy, ie: the courts, lawyers, experts, etc.
The following video clips provide a quick overview of the basic Orwellian themes:
http://myspacetv.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.individual&videoid=2805606
The overt fraud, corruption, and bungling incompetance of beauracracies, is illustrated by Kafka's nightmarish story 'The Trial'. Overt government corruption and greed describes the Kleptocracy government model, or rule by thieves. Kafka correctly identifies the incompetance and absurdity that often follows Kleptocracy in a form of beauracracy that can be described as Idiocracy. [form of government in which a country is run by fools]. The following video do not really capture the essence of 'Kafka', so you may need to watch the entire movie, either the old version with Anthony Hopkins and Orson Wells, or the newer remake. The book is very difficult to comprehend, and 'Kafka' is confusing. An important concept to grasp from 'The Trial' is that it warns of the coming tyranny of fascism, being written in 1925 Germany. More importantly it illustrates the corruption, incompetance, greed, and absurdly irrational nature of beauracracies that comprise the unjust and oppressive state of tyranny.
Orwell's '1984' envisions a Autocracy that is a brilliant conspiracy of a few genious arch villians controlling the ignorant masses. Kafka nails it better by illustrating the petty, greedy, incompetant, stupidity at the lowest levels on up that engage in beauracratic rituals aimed at strenghening thier own positions within the abusrd and corrput machine. The satirical Idiocracy described by Kafka makes no sense, which is exactly the point, and his works are often described to be more like an abstract nightmare for this reason.
When Kleptocracy and Idiocracy themes merge together, we have a lucid explanation of what is happening in America today, including the criminalization of America:
We now live under Kleptocracy , Autocracy, Beauracracy, and Idiocracy.... more
-
