Our Grand Children are victims of;

"Protect the "system" at all costs. The "system" is the only ultimate sacred cow - not any particular law or constitution, but only "the system." Because, ultimately, it is the system which makes certain that the individuals functioning within it - from judges to lawyers, to prosecutors, to politicians, to businessmen - have their places and positions, and opportunities and pecking order, and future."

In 1696, England first used the legal principle of parens patriae, which gave the royal crown care of "charities, infants, idiots, and lunatics returned to the chancery." This principal of parens patriae has been identified as the statutory basis for U.S. governmental intervention in families' child rearing practices.

"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."
Preamble of the original "organic" Constitution

"We hold these truths to be self-evident. That all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; that to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed; that whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles, and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness."
Excerpted from the Declaration of Independence of the original thirteen united states of America, July 4, 1776

Thursday, August 30, 2012

Just Who's Abusing Whom?

Just Who's Abusing Whom? 
By: Annette M. Hall
Today in America, 935 children were forcibly removed from their home and entered the national foster care system. Admittedly, some of these children may actually be helped by the system on some level. What about those children who get caught in the web unjustifiably? Did you know that 20% of all children in California are in foster care. I wanted to bring you the actual numbers, so you can see for yourself just how tragic the situation is. However the way the numbers are tabulated, showing exact numbers of children and families affected by current child welfare laws is nearly impossible. Our federal government relies on voluntary participation by each state, in any given year; only 30 to 35 states actually report the number of children being held in state custody. Further exacerbating the problem of accurate tabulation is that states only report the number of children actually in care on September 30th of each year. It would be easy to return a large number of children to their parents, in early September to skew the numbers just enough to cover up the immensity of the problem. I have uncovered no actual data to prove such a plan is in action, but it is a plausible one. The federal government reports skew the actual number of children affected even more by including adults from the age of 18 to 21. Generally, the only time a child is retained in custody past their 18th birth date is when they are being held on probation by a juvenile court because of past criminal activity, until they reach the age of 21. However, by including these children among those in foster care, it increases the population statistics, making it appear that far fewer children are affected on a percentage basis, creating a false picture. We can get an idea of the enormity of the problem, simply by viewing the financial records made available to the public. In 1989, the federal government spent $1.2 billion dollars on reimbursing state spending on foster care. It was estimated at that time that by 2004, federal spending on foster care would reach $6.2 billion dollars, an increase of over 420% within 15 years. Actual spending far surpassed those estimates and topped $22.2 billion in child welfare activity spending in 2002. This is an industry, which has grown by huge proportions and must be reined in. The Gestapo type tactics currently being used by state agencies, to increase revenue from federal sources may provide jobs today for the local economy but is having a negative impact on many levels. When individuals no longer have faith in the rule of law, there is a breakdown in society that will not recover quickly, if at all. The family has long been recognized as the fabric of society, strong families make for strong communities and laws govern a civilized nation. Millions have been unjustly targeted by state policies, under the guise of the rule of law, turning formerly law-abiding citizens into criminals, who are fearful of retaliation by their own government and who will never again look at the state in the same way again. The children, who have been removed from loving homes, forced to live with strangers, are often used as slave labor and certainly not nurtured in the way a parent would, will grow up fearful, unattached and insecure. These young ones will bear the brunt of the wounds inflicted upon them, the emotional scars will last a lifetime. The downward spiral of our society will continue unabated until drastic changes are enacted, which actually provides protections for not only the children involved but also the family as a unit. A strong family is the backbone of this nation, current policies and trends in family law and child protective services have hit the family hard, touching the lives of untold millions. When a family is unjustly targeted by child protection workers for an "investigation", whether the children are removed or not, the entire family is affected. Resources that should have been used to provide the necessities such as food and shelter get diverted to attorney fees, transportation and various doctors to cover the cost of supplying the court with reports. If the children are removed from the home more funds are diverted for the cost of supervised visitation, psychological evaluations, more attorney fees and expert witnesses. If the family in question was being held together by peanut butter and jelly as many are in today's economic times. The family now under distress many be forced to sell off their belongings, take out an equity line of credit, a home loan, be forced to give up their transportation or even sacrifice their home all together, the very one they need in order to prove to the court that they can care for their own children.A recent ruling in the Pennsylvania Superior Court is a step in the right direction toward securing fourth amendment rights for families. The case involved Susquehanna County parents Robert and Susan Gauthier, who refused a caseworker's demand to enter their home to investigate an allegation, only to be subjected to a search, when the county Services for Children and Youth agency got a court order forcing them to open their door. The Superior Court found that caseworkers requesting court orders to enter homes must show probable cause, the type of standard required of police seeking search warrants. Family courts are required to uphold the law of the land and ensure the constitutional rights of those who fall under its jurisdiction. However, it's up to an informed citizenry to actually demand constitutional protections. This is the crux of the problem. It takes money and lots of it to obtain justice and today's court system targets the impoverished that are unable to obtain justice. After all, we only receive as much justice as we can afford. The struggle for family justice will be a tough one, however more officials are slowly beginning to realize the enormity of the problem and are beginning to act. The process will be painfully slow and take several years to accomplish any meaningful changes in current laws and policy. If you have not already done so, contact your legislators and educate them on the plight of the family. Encourage them to enact meaningful changes to protect not only the children but the family unit. Parenting children in today's world is not an easy task, parents deserve the benefit of the doubt and a right to protect and raise their children in a manner consistent with their beliefs. Our government does not have the right to usurp a parents authority, unless that child is in clear and present danger. There isn't a court in the world that will ever convince me that 20% of all the children within the state of California are being or have been abused. That would mean that 1 child in every 5 has been removed from their parents because of abuse. It's just not so.
*The posts made in this blog are of our opinion only* Without Prejudice UCC 1-207

Friday, August 24, 2012

5 years in prison for a social worker who filed fake reports about sexual abuse involving children

A former social worker, who admitted she lied about sexual abuse cases involving children, has been sentenced to five years in prison.

Geri Murphy learned her sentence Tuesday morning in Anderson County. She pleaded guilty to nine counts of falsifying documents.

Prosecutors said Murphy left children in homes where they were being sexually assaulted, never looked into the claims, then lied to the state. Among the more disturbing cases listed in her indictment, the sexual abuse of a three-year-old by their biological father.

"The court has reviewed all the information in this case and is frankly disturbed by the nature of actions or non-actions that were taken in these specific instances," Judge Charles Hickman said from the bench.

A state official testified before Murphy was sentenced Tuesday, saying abuse in Kentucky continues because of Murphy's actions.

"The fact that these children could be left in the hands of possible abusres is particularly disturbing to the court," Hickman said. "To grant probation would diminish the seriousness of these offenses and I'm denying the motion for probation."

Murphy appeared to be surprised she was denied probation and sentenced to five years as she was taken into custody.

Assistant Attorney General Barbara Whaley commented "I feel like it sent a message---the system meant to protect children cannot be breached without serious consequences."

Murphy has been living in Florida. Judge Hickman says she must serve her time in Kentucky.

*The posts made in this blog are of our opinion only* Without Prejudice UCC 1-207

Thursday, August 23, 2012

Brian Gerrish (Common Purpose) takes on Social workers & Adoption Agencies

Brian Gerrish takes on our social services. CAFCASS, CPS, DCSF, BAAF, CORAM, hang your head in shame.

Brian Gerrish is working with Ian Josephs of www.forced-adoption.com, who works with John Hemming MP.
This series was filmed by EMTV.

*The posts made in this blog are of our opinion only* Without Prejudice UCC 1-207

Sunday, August 19, 2012

On this day... In Memoriam

On this day one year ago, our grand children were kidnapped for profit by the office of children's services in Fairbanks, Alaska.

  In Memoriam

In our hearts your memory lingers, sweetly, tender, fond and true. There is not a day, dear children, that we do not think of you.

*The posts made in this blog are of our opinion only* Without Prejudice UCC 1-207

Saturday, August 18, 2012

The Proposed Parental Rights Amendment to the U.S. Constitution


The liberty of parents to direct the upbringing, education, and care of their children is a fundamental right. 


Neither the United States nor any state shall infringe this right without demonstrating that its governmental interest as applied to the person is of the highest order and not otherwise served.


This article shall not be construed to apply to a parental action or decision that would end life.



No treaty may be adopted nor shall any source of international law be employed to supersede, modify, interpret, or apply to the rights guaranteed by this article.

Senate Sponsors
Below is a list of Senate cosponsors of SJRes42, the Parental Rights Amendment in the 112th Congress (2011-12).
If either of your Senators is on the list below, you may want to write a letter of thanks to him or her for supporting the Amendment in the Senate.
(For a list of Senate cosponsors in the 111th Congress (2009-10), click here.)
Find your Senators' contact information by clicking on your state on our States Watch page.

The following members of the U.S. Senate have sponsored the Parental Rights Amendment in the 112th Congress (2011-12): [As of this date]
Sen. Jim DeMint (SC), lead sponsor.
Sen. Lindsey Graham (SC)
Sen. Saxby Chambliss (GA)
Sen. Mike Enzi (WY)
Sen. John Barasso (WY)
Sen. Charles Grassley (IA)
Sen. Roy Blunt (MO)
Sen. Johnny Isakson (GA)
Sen. James Risch (ID)
Sen. Mike Lee (UT)
Sen. Marco Rubio (FL)
Sen. John Boozman (AR)
Sen. Jerry Moran (KS)
Congressional Sponsors
Below is a list of Congressional cosponsors of HJRes110, the Parental Rights Amendment, in the 2011-12 Congress.
(To see a list of Congressional cosponsors of the Parental Rights Amendment in the 2009-10 Congress, click here.)
If your current Representative is on this list, you may want to email them and thank them for cosponsoring the Parental Rights Amendment.
Find your Congressman's contact information, or check for cosponsors by state, by clicking on your state from our States Watch page or the sidebar at right.
The following members of the 112th U.S. House of Representatives have sponsored the Parental Rights Amendment:
Rep. Trent Franks (AZ-2), lead sponsor
Rep. Todd Akin (MO-2) Rep. Rodney Alexander (LA-5) Rep. Spencer Bachus (AL-6)
Rep. Roscoe Bartlett (MD-6) Rep. Dan Benishek (MI-1) Rep. Rob Bishop (UT-1)
Rep. Marsha Blackburn (TN-7) Rep. Jo Bonner (AL-1) Rep. Mo Brooks (AL-5)
Rep. Paul Broun (GA-10) Rep. Vern Buchanan (FL-13) Rep. Dan Burton (IN-5)
Rep. Dave Camp (MI-4) Rep. Francisco Canseco (TX-23) Rep. Bill Cassidy (LA-6)
Rep. Mike Coffman (CO-6) Rep. Chip Cravaack (MN-8) Rep. Geoff Davis (KY-4)
Rep. Jeff Duncan (SC-3) Rep. Stephen Fincher (TN-8) Rep. John Fleming (LA-4)
Rep. Randy Forbes (VA-4) Rep. Jeff Fortenberry (NE-1) Rep. Trent Franks (AZ-2)
Rep. Elton Gallegley (CA-24) Rep. Phil Gingrey (GA-11) Rep. Robert Goodlatte (VA-6)
Rep. Paul Gosar (AZ-1) Rep. Gregg Harper (MS-3) Rep. Andy Harris (MD-1)
Rep. Vicky Hartzler (MO-4) Rep. Bill Huizinga (MI-2) Rep. Randy Hultgren (IL-14)
Rep. Duncan Hunter (CA-52) Rep. Bill Johnson (OH-6) Rep. Tim Johnson (IL-15)
Rep. Walter Jones (NC-3) Rep. Jim Jordan (OH-4) Rep. Mike Kelly (PA-3)
Rep. Steve King (IA-5) Rep. John Kline (MN-2) Rep. Doug Lamborn (CO-5)
Rep. Jeff Landry (LA-3) Rep. Tom Latham (IA-4) Rep. Robert Latta (OH-5)
Rep. Cynthia Lummis (WY) Rep. Donald Manzullo (IL-16) Rep. Kenny Marchant (TX-24)
Rep. Tom McClintock (CA-4) Rep. Thad McCotter (MI-11) Rep. Candice Miller (MI-10)
Rep. Jeff Miller (FL-1) Rep. Tim Murphy (PA-18) Rep. Sue Myrick (NC-9)
Rep. Randy Neugebauer (TX-19) Rep. Rich Nugent (FL-5) Rep. Alan Nunnelee (MS-1)
Rep. Pete Olson (TX-22) Rep. Steven Palazzo (MS-4) Rep. Joe Pitts (PA-16)
Rep. Todd Platts (PA-19) Rep. Denny Rehberg (MT) Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers (WA-5)
Rep. Mike D. Rogers (AL-3) Rep. Todd Rokita (IN-5) Rep. Peter Roskam (IL-6)
Rep. Dennis Ross (FL-12) Rep. Ed Royce (CA-40) Rep. David Schwiekert (AZ-5)
Rep. Pete Sessions (TX-32) Rep. Chris Smith (NJ-4) Rep. Pat Tiberi (OH-12)
Rep. Fred Upton (MI-6) Rep. Tim Walberg (MI-7) Rep. Joe Walsh (IL-8)
Rep. Lynn Westmoreland (GA-3) Rep. Joe Wilson (SC-2) Rep. Rob Wittman (VA-1)
Rep. Frank Wolf (VA-10) Rep. Don Young (AK)

*The posts made in this blog are of our opinion only* Without Prejudice UCC 1-207

The Truth About How Social Services Get Away With Removing Children From Their Loving Families...

*The posts made in this blog are of our opinion only* Without Prejudice UCC 1-207

Thursday, August 16, 2012

List of Legal Organizations

From a friend... [http://www.facebook.com/Puppyluv2]

Dear Vicki

Thank you for contacting us. I am attaching a list of legal organizations as well as three Nevada attorneys. Please note that while many of these organizations can offer free legal help, the individual attorneys cannot promise the same.

List of Legal Organizations

Heritage Defense (http://www.heritagedefense.org)
Defends the rights of Christian parents, particularly in social services cases.
Phone:  1-800-515-5901

Alliance Defense Fund (http://www.alliancedefensefund.org/main/default.aspx)
Coordinates attorneys across the nation who litigate for the defense of religious freedom, the sanctity of human life, and traditional family values.

Liberty Council (http://lc.org)
A non-profit organization whose goal is to provide educationalresources and free legal service, the Liberty Council defends religious freedom, the sanctity of human life and traditional family values.

Rutherford Institute (http://www.rutherford.org)
Among many areas of litigation the Rutherford Institute will provide free legal service for cases involving the protection of parental rights.

Thomas More Law Center (http://thomasmore.org)
A non-profit legal organization dedicated to providing freelegal assistance for the defense of religious freedom of Christians, time-honored family values, and the sanctity of human life.

Pacific Justice Institute (http://www.pacificjustice.org)
A legal institute dedicated to providing free legal service that protect parental rights, in addition to other civil liberties.
Email: info@pacificjustice.org
Phone 916.857.6900 M-F 8:30 am to 5:00 pm.

The Justice Foundation (http://www.txjf.org/)
The Justice Foundation is a non-profit litigation firm dedicated to providing free legal service defending fundamental freedoms including cases involving parental school choice and parental rights in education.  Please note as of 1/30/08, they are unable to take cases regarding parental rights in education.

Parenting and Politics
An organization that might have helpful resources.

Family Defense Center
Helps families whose children might be taken away and be placed in foster care.

National Parents' Rights Association
This organization exists to educate and inform parents of their parental rights.

CPS Watch Legal Team
This organization helps families under attack from CPS.

http://www.aboutthechildren.org -  1-800-787-4981 - Please use webform to enter case details
Legal assistance for pro se litigants in a number of issue areas, including the following: Child Custody, Child Visitation, Child Support, Out of State Issues, Stop Move, Temporary Orders, Restraining Orders, Divorce, Drivers License Suspension, Father's Rights, Mother's Rights, Grandparent's Rights, Paternity Issues, Self Help Solutions, Contempt of Court, and Emergency Protective Custody Orders.

National Family Solutions
http://www.nationalfamilysolutions.com -  1-800-608-5882 - Please use webform to enter case details
Nationwide family law advocacy program that utilizes the expertise of attorneys, legal document specialists and case managers all working together to provide each of their clients with a personalized program, giving them the ability to resolve their family law issue in a timely and affordable manner. Specialties include: family law, divorce, custody, visitation, child/spousal support, and fathers rights. Geared towards assisting pro se litigants.

RepresentYou.com is a State Bar Certified Lawyer Referral Service and one of their panel member attorneys is suing on behalf of families who have been wrongfully separated by child services and have had their children put into the foster care system for no reason. There is no cost to people who use their service, they refer clients to the lawyers for free and the lawyers sue on their behalf on a contingency fee basis. You may reach them locally at  310-966-9004 or toll-free at  1-888-973-7968. Be sure to ask for Tom Dell, their child protective services cases intake person.

The above list of legal organizations is provided to give you options as you search for attorneys to take your case. ParentalRights.org is not affiliated with the above legal organizations and can not guarantee that your case will be taken.
Mr. Randy Rumph
2300 W. Sahara Ave., Suite 500
Las Vegas, NV 89102
O: (702) 388-4466

Mr. Chip Siegel
601 S. 7th Street
Las Vegas, NV 89101
(702) 387-2447
Stephen C. Balkenbush
Thorndal, Armstrong, Delk, Balkenbush & Eisinger
6590 S. McCarran Blvd., Suite B
Reno, NV 89509
O: (775) 786-2882

I wish you the best in finding the information you need.
Michael McBride
Administrative Coordinator

For those of you who get glassy eyed when we tell our stories of how our kids and grand kids are kidnapped by CPS for profit, think again. These are not isolated incidents. It is happening all over the US and the world. It is a HUGE money maker.

*The posts made in this blog are of our opinion only* Without Prejudice UCC 1-207

County hands over $1 million dollars to family whose son was taken by Child Protective Services

County hands over $1 million dollars to family whose son was taken by Child Protective Services

 Kern County is handing over one million dollars to a family in the Weldon area for wrongfully taking their son out of their home in 2008. The dispute started between the child's school, South Fork Elementary School and parents over what their kid could eat. While the school can't comment on the case until the settlement is signed; attorneys on both sides are talking about the bigger issues being brought out by this case.

"They are relieved that the case is resolved, they are relieved that at least financially they are put back in a position where they were before this all happened," said Shawn McMillan attorney for Darlene and Larry McCue. McMillan says the McCue's spent every penny they had to get their son back through juvenile court proceedings. McMillan says his clients are now picking up the pieces of their lives after the four year court case has ended, with the McCue's winning a million dollar settlement from Kern County.

"I think it's a fair result under the circumstances considering what they had spent," said County Attorney, Mark Nations. According to the county the whole situation started in 2008 when McCue brought up allergy concerns with her 7 year old son's school. "He had a nut allergy and she did not feel the school had adequately addressed it," said Nations. According to county counsel, the boy's parents insisted on extensive medical testing which is what initially lead to questions about the boy’s safety. "We got a referral from UCLA Medical Center indicating that they were concerned that a parent was perhaps exaggerating the conditions of a child and receiving unnecessary medical care," explained Nations.

The county acted on that referral and after an investigation by CPS and the Kern County Sheriff's Department, the boy was taken from his parent's home for four months. Later, a juvenile judge ruled that there was no evidence that the boy was in danger. "There is a lot of frustration there is a lot of anger and understandably so. Mrs. McCue is still angry at the county," said McMillan the McCue family attorney.

Child Protective Services is now working on a new policy that would require social workers to get a warrant from a judge before they can take a child from their home. "This is the first case of this kind that we've ever had in the county, it's helped us evaluate the way we do things," said Nations. The family's attorney also responded with positive outlook on the proposed policies. "Kern County is a shining beacon of hope in this state because they are really trying to make an effort to change some things," said McMillan.

Still no word on when CPS is going to change their policies to include a warrant, but the county tells us that ball is already rolling on that issue. We'll let you know what happens next.

"Child Protective Services is now working on a new policy that would require social workers to get a warrant from a judge before they can take a child from their home."

Talk about blowing smoke up your skirt. CPS should make a new policy where they actually read the U.S. Constitution and the bill of rights.

"This is the first case [we ever got caught at] of this kind that we've ever had in the county, it's helped us evaluate the way we do things,"

 They missed a few words million dollar words.

*The posts made in this blog are of our opinion only* Without Prejudice UCC 1-207

Wednesday, August 15, 2012

County loses $4.9 million lawsuit challenge over lying social workers

County loses $4.9 million lawsuit challenge over lying social workers
 "The County of Orange lost its battle in the U.S. Supreme Court Monday to overturn a record-setting $4.9 million judgment awarded to a Seal Beach woman, after two county social workers lied to a juvenile court commissioner in order to take away the woman’s two daughters.
It took Deanna Fogarty-Hardwick 6 ½ years to regain custody of her children.
The jury award given to Fogarty-Hardwick included damages against the two social workers. The Supreme Court also upheld $1.6 million in attorneys fees for Fogarty-Hardwick’s attorneys, but that could end being as much as $3 million, Fogarty-Hardwick’s attorney Shawn McMillan said.
The county and the two social workers will also be responsible for paying interest which has accrued on the $4.9 million jury award over the last four years, bringing the grand total close to $9.3 million, McMillan said.
Fogarty-Hardwick’s attorneys had offered to settle with the county for $500,000.
Orange County Social Services social workers Marcie Vreeken and Helen Dwojak filed false reports and held back evidence which would have cleared Fogarty-Hardwick, an Orange County jury found. Vreeken would later be promoted, according to county records.
A third social worker was found not liable.
According to court papers, Vreeken threatened that if Fogarty-Hardwick did not “submit” to her will, she would never see her children again. The social workers also tried in 2000 to coerce Fogarty-Hardwick to sign a document saying she was a bad parent by threatening to take her daughters away, Fogarty-Hardwick alleged.
She refused. A county commissioner ordered Fogarty-Hardwick’s daughters, 6 and 9, taken from their mother and put in Orangewood Children’s Home.
The girls were later put in foster care.
Fogarty-Hardwick gave her ex-husband full custody in 2002, hoping to protect her daughters. She was then allowed two supervised visits a month for two years. She eventually won 50-50 custody in 2006.
Fogarty-Hardwick sued the county in 2002, arguing the Social Services Agency and its two social workers violated her civil rights. A jury ruled against her.
She sued again, arguing this time county’s policies violated her constitutional rights, including her Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment rights.
Fogarty-Hardwick’s accused the county of violating her constitutional rights by removing her children without making a finding of imminent danger or serious physical injury; interviewing her daughters without a parent present; holding her children without cause; fabricating evidence; and failing to properly train employees about parents’ constitutional rights.
An Orange County jury voted 10-2 in 2007 in favor of Fogarty-Hardwick and awarded her $4.9 million.
The county appealed the judgment.
In the Fourth District Court of Appeal opinion, Justice William Bedsworth wrote, “the evidence adduced at trial obviously caused both the jury and the judge to conclude not only that something seriously wrong was done to Fogarty-Hardwick in this case, but also that the wrongful conduct was not an isolated incident.”
“Despite Fogarty-Hardwick’s complaints, and the concerns expressed by others about the handling of this dependency case, SSA did not investigate the situation or consider assigning different social workers to the matter. Neither of the social workers involved was disciplined. Instead, Vreeken was promoted to supervisor in 2001,” Bedsworth wrote.
The Watchdog is looking into whether Vreeken and Dwojak still work for the county.
“What the county and these social workers did to her was horrendous and she deserves to be compensated in full measure,” McMillan said.
“It’s a big deal for a private citizen to take on the government all the way to the United States Supreme Court,” McMillan said.  “(Fogarty-Hardwick) poured her whole life into this case. She provided a valuable service to Orange County and to other parents for having the tenacity to stick with it.”
We have calls in to Social Services and the county’s lawyer. We’ll let you know what they have to say when we hear back."

*The posts made in this blog are of our opinion only* Without Prejudice UCC 1-207

From Coast to Coast AM with millions of listeners

From Coast to Coast AM with millions of listeners;

Are You Passionate About Something And Want To Sound Off?

Think about it, pick your topic, and email us your one (1) minute editorial and we just might record you and play it on Coast to Coast AM.

Beginning Wed, August 29, 2012, and every Wednesday from there on, we will play on-air a recorded editorial from a Coast listener. It could be you!

Just email your submissions to whatyathinkeditorial@aol.com. Include your name and phone number and we just might be calling you.

*The posts made in this blog are of our opinion only* Without Prejudice UCC 1-207

Tuesday, August 14, 2012

U.N. treaty threatens U.S. homeschoolers

As re-posted from :  WND Education

DeMint: U.N. treaty threatens U.S. homeschoolers

Republican defends against liberals intent on imposing backdoor globalism

In the past few weeks, two proposed United Nations treaties failed to advance. The small-arms treaty failed at the U.N. while opponents of the Law of the Sea Treaty (LOST) amassed enough votes to block it in the U.S. Senate.
Now, Sen. Jim DeMint,R-S.C., says another U.N. treaty that threatens American sovereignty has been put back on the table by foreign diplomats and their internationalist allies in the federal government. It’s called the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Disabled, which calls for government agents to supersede the authority of parents of disabled children and even covers abortion.
Proponents, including many Republicans, claim it will help to expand rights and opportunities for disabled people in all nations, but DeMint isn’t buying it.
“When you look at the language in the treaty you realize there are other things at stake here. A lot of language in there that has nothing to do with disabilities and that is likely to push the U.S. toward more international law,” DeMint told WND.
DeMint says the language of the treaty suggests it will promote abortion and chip away at parental rights — particularly the rights of homeschooling parents.
“Homeschoolers are up in arms. We already have some judges in our country that are using international law to change our laws.
“We’re afraid that if the language suggests that parental authority is not absolute, we’re going to have an international body telling our parents they can’t homeschool.”
The senator says the U.S. is by far the most accommodating nation in the world for people with disabilities and he sees no need to sign this or most other U.N.treaties because it can only erode American sovereignty.
“We’re well entangled at this point, we don’t need another treaty.”
DeMint explains what he thinks supporters of the treaty are missing and how he thinks a Senate vote on the treaty would go if it were held today.
“America needs to be the model of the world. We need to be the light rather than trying to submit ourselves to other nations.”

*The posts made in this blog are of our opinion only* Without Prejudice UCC 1-207

Sunday, August 12, 2012


Psychopsema psy-cho-pse-ma is a system of questionable actions that a Social Service agency or a Child Protection Service agency might utilize to achieve profit, through fraudulent means.

Psychopsema is mainly categorized as an orchestrated assault, utilizing several methods of fraud, psychological operations, psychological intimidation and other similar premeditated offense based systems, against a parent, a child or a family.

A malicious social worker or other malicious social service professionals (usually, employed by a Child Protection Service (CPS) agency or a similar social service agency) are commonly identified as utilizing this system or methodology to achieve profit.

Psychopsema is usually implemented to deflect attention, away from crimes committed by said workers against children. As, those children are sometimes canvased for the purpose of profit.

The term and description were created by Canadian and American social service crime researchers Nicolas Stathopoulos and Felicita Luna in early 2011. Both researchers are part of SSEC Social Service Economic Crimes (research)
1 - A false report of child abuse is authored by a group of social workers against a single parent or parents. The colluding workers then, utilize the methodology of psychopsema to profit from the crime.

2 - A malicious social service worker colludes with her peers to fabricate evidence and to practice psychopsema.

3 - The system of psychopsema subjects a victim into the social service system without merit or justification.

4 - Psychopsema is mainly categorized as an orchestrated assault against a parent, a child or a family by a social service worker, seeking to profit from a crime.


*The posts made in this blog are of our opinion only* Without Prejudice UCC 1-207

Saturday, August 4, 2012

The Wolf in Sheep's Clothing

 "A Wolf in Sheep's Clothing is an idiom of Biblical origin. It is used of those playing a role contrary to their real character, with whom contact is dangerous."
" The phrase originates in a sermon by Jesus recorded in the Christian New Testament: Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves (Gospel of Matthew 7:15,
King James Version). The sermon then suggests that their true nature will be revealed by their actions (by their fruits shall ye know them, verse 16). In the centuries following, the phrase was used many times in the Latin writings of the Church Fathers[1] and later on in European vernacular literature.[2] A Latin proverb also emerged, Pelle sub agnina latitat mens saepe lupina (Under a sheep’s skin often hides a wolfish mind)."
Source:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wolf_in_Sheep%27s_Clothing

"An Excerpt from the book: In Sheep's Clothing
By George K. Simon

Two Basic Types of Aggression

There are two basic types of aggression: overt-aggression and covert-aggression. When you're determined to have something and you're open, direct and obvious in your manner of fighting, your behavior is best labeled overtly aggressive."
"When you're out to "win," dominate or control, but are subtle, underhanded or deceptive enough to hide your true intentions, your behavior is most appropriately labeled covertly aggressive. Now, avoiding any overt display of aggression while simultaneously intimidating others into giving you what you want is a powerfully manipulative maneuver. That's why covert-aggression is most often the vehicle for interpersonal manipulation."

"Acts of Covert-Aggression vs. Covert-Aggressive Personalities"

"Most of us have engaged in some sort of covertly aggressive behavior from time to time. Periodically trying to manipulate a person or a situation doesn't make someone a covert-aggressive personality. Personality can be defined by the way a person habitually perceives, relates to and interacts with others and the world at large."
"The tactics of deceit, manipulation and control are a steady diet for covert-aggressive personality. It's the way they prefer to deal with others and to get the things they want in life."
"The Process of Victimization"
"For a long time, I wondered why manipulation victims have a hard time seeing what really goes on in manipulative interactions. At first, I was tempted to fault them. But I've learned that they get hoodwinked for some very good reasons:"

"1.  A manipulator's aggression is not obvious."
"2.  The tactics manipulators use can make it seem like they're hurting, caring, defending, ..., almost anything but fighting. These tactics are hard to recognize as merely clever ploys."
"3.  All of us have weaknesses and insecurities that a clever manipulator might exploit."
"4.  What our gut tells us a manipulator is like, challenges everything we've been taught to believe about human nature."

"Recognizing Aggressive Agendas"

"Not recognizing and accurately labeling their subtly aggressive moves causes most people to misinterpret the behavior of manipulators and, therefore, fail to respond to them in an appropriate fashion. Recognizing when and how manipulators are fighting with covertly aggressive tactics is essential."

"Defense Mechanisms and Offensive Tactics"

"Covert-aggressive personalities (indeed all aggressive personalities) use a variety of mental behaviors and interpersonal maneuvers to help ensure they get what they want."


"This is when the aggressor refuses to admit that they've done something harmful or hurtful when they clearly have. It's a way they lie (to themselves as well as to others) about their aggressive intentions. This "Who... Me?" tactic is a way of "playing innocent," and invites the victim to feel unjustified in confronting the aggressor about the inappropriateness of a behavior. It's also the way the aggressor gives him/herself permission to keep right on doing what they want to do."

"Selective Inattention"

"This tactic is similar to and sometimes mistaken for denial It's when the aggressor "plays dumb," or acts oblivious. When engaging in this tactic, the aggressor actively ignores the warnings, pleas or wishes of others, and in general, refuses to pay attention to everything and anything that might distract them from pursuing their own agenda."


"A rationalization is the excuse an aggressor tries to offer for engaging in an inappropriate or harmful behavior. It can be an effective tactic, especially when the explanation or justification the aggressor offers makes just enough sense that any reasonably conscientious person is likely to fall for it. It's a powerful tactic because it not only serves to remove any internal resistance the aggressor might have about doing what he wants to do (quieting any qualms of conscience he might have) but also to keep others off his back. If the aggressor can convince you he's justified in whatever he's doing, then he's freer to pursue his goals without interference."


"A moving target is hard to hit. When we try to pin a manipulator down or try to keep a discussion focused on a single issue or behavior we don't like, he's expert at knowing how to change the subject, dodge the issue or in some way throw us a curve. Manipulators use distraction and diversion techniques to keep the focus off their behavior, move us off-track, and keep themselves free to promote their self-serving hidden agendas."


"It's often hard to tell when a person is lying at the time he's doing it. Fortunately, there are times when the truth will come out because circumstances don't bear out somebody's story. But there are also times when you don't know you've been deceived until it's too late. One way to minimize the chances that someone will put one over on you is to remember that because aggressive personalities of all types will generally stop at nothing to get what they want, you can expect them to lie and cheat. Another thing to remember is that manipulators – covert-aggressive personalities that they are – are prone to lie in subtle, covert ways. Courts are well aware of the many ways that people lie, as they require that court oaths charge that testifiers tell "the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth." Manipulators often lie by withholding a significant amount of the truth from you or by distorting the truth. They are adept at being vague when you ask them direct questions. This is an especially slick way of lying' omission. Keep this in mind when dealing with a suspected wolf in sheep's clothing. Always seek and obtain specific, confirmable information."

"Covert Intimidation"

"Aggressors frequently threaten their victims to keep them anxious, apprehensive and in a one-down position. Covert-aggressives intimidate their victims by making veiled (subtle, indirect or implied) threats. Guilt-tripping and shaming are two of the covert-aggressive's favourite weapons. Both are special intimidation tactics."


"One thing that aggressive personalities know well is that other types of persons have very different consciences than they do. Manipulators are often skilled at using what they know to be the greater conscientiousness of their victims as a means of keeping them in a self-doubting, anxious, and submissive position. The more conscientious the potential victim, the more effective guilt is as a weapon."


"This is the technique of using subtle sarcasm and put-downs as a means of increasing fear and self-doubt in others. Covert-aggressives use this tactic to make others feel inadequate or unworthy, and therefore, defer to them. It's an effective way to foster a continued sense of personal inadequacy in the weaker party, thereby allowing an aggressor to maintain a position of dominance."

"Playing the Victim Role"

"This tactic involves portraying oneself as an innocent victim of circumstances or someone else's behavior in order to gain sympathy, evoke compassion and thereby get something from another. One thing that covert-aggressive personalities count on is the fact that less calloused and less hostile personalities usually can't stand to see anyone suffering. Therefore, the tactic is simple. Convince your victim you're suffering in some way, and they'll try to relieve your distress."

"Vilifying the Victim"

"This tactic is frequently used in conjunction with the tactic of playing the victim role. The aggressor uses this tactic to make it appear he is only responding (i.e. defending himself against) aggression on the part of the victim. It enables the aggressor to better put the victim on the defensive."

"Playing the Servant Role"

"Covert-aggressives use this tactic to cloak their self-serving agendas in the guise of service to a more noble cause. It's a common tactic but difficult to recognize. By pretending to be working hard on someone else's behalf, covert-aggressives conceal their own ambition, desire for power, and quest for a position of dominance over others."


"Covert-aggressive personalities are adept at charming, praising, flattering or overtly supporting others in order to get them to lower their defenses and surrender their trust and loyalty. Covert-aggressives are also particularly aware that people who are to some extent emotionally needy and dependent (and that includes most people who aren't character-disordered) want approval, reassurance, and a sense of being valued and needed more than anything. Appearing to be attentive to these needs can be a manipulator's ticket to incredible power over others."

"Projecting the blame (blaming others)"

"Aggressive personalities are always looking for a way to shift the blame for their aggressive behavior. Covert-aggressives are not only skilled at finding scapegoats, they're expert at doing so in subtle, hard to detect ways."


"This tactic is a unique kind of denial coupled with rationalization. When using this maneuver, the aggressor is attempting to assert that his abusive behavior isn't really as harmful or irresponsible as someone else may be claiming. It's the aggressor's attempt to make a molehill out of a mountain."

"Anyone dealing with a covertly aggressive person will need to heighten gut-level sensitivity to the use of these tactics if they're to avoid being taken in by them."                          

Source:  Psychopaths in Sheep's Clothing

*The posts and quotes made on this page are for educational purposes only.
*The posts made in this blog are of our opinion only* Without Prejudice UCC 1-207

Coffee talk with Robert Coleman exposing corruption with CPS

A new book written by local resident [Huron, South Dakota] Robert Coleman describes the true-life story of his family’s nightmare experiences at the hands of CPS (Child Protective Services) in the state of Michigan.
The events took place in 2008 when the Coleman family claims they were falsely accused of child abuse by a vindictive couple they had evicted from the apartments the Colemans owned in Ironwood, Michigan.
In Coleman’s account, he describes how local law enforcement authorities and state officials, eager to go after him because of previous conflicts he had experienced with them via disputes he had with them while in business in Ironwood, jumped at the opportunity when the claims were made, without properly investigating the backgrounds and claims of the vindictive couple. The ensuing investigation purportedly included statements of his then six-year-old step daughter, who today at age ten, denies much of what the state claimed happened. The step daughter’s own account of what, in fact, took place, indicates the state used threats that she could never go home unless she said what they wanted her to say as a means of getting her to say what she did, in fact, say. That was coupled with many straight out lies, according to Coleman, as well as creation of so-called evidence manufactured by the state, which was never supported by any indisputable facts. Coleman’s claims in the book are all supported by either tape recordings he made of state officials at the time, the state’s own memos created at the time, or in actual court proceedings, which are fully documented in Coleman’s book.
The book further exploits the state of Michigan’s documented abuses of the CPS system, with referrals to other abusive CPS cases that resulted in a class action lawsuit, lost by the state of Michigan, a direct result of their abusive actions. In Coleman’s case, the state actually raided his hotel room at three o’clock in the morning, in a kidnap style, swat type of raid, to take his children on a Sunday morning, and attempted to paint Robert up as a dangerous person, when in fact, he had no criminal record nor as much as a fight in school while growing up to support such allegations.
The Coleman family left Ironwood when their case was finally closed in 2009, seeking out a desirable community to live in, and finally settled on Huron where Robert went about the writing of this book and the family now enjoys a new and peaceful life. Robert is presently engaged in his effort to establish a book publishing
business where others, such as himself, can effectively expose corruption and abuse by the system in real life cases such as his own. According to Coleman, there are plenty of those stories to be divulged.

A must read. Also a need to watch video below. Are your children next?

*The posts made in this blog are of our opinion only* Without Prejudice UCC 1-207

Wednesday, August 1, 2012

Children Just Don't stop Dancing

*The posts made in this blog are of our opinion only* Without Prejudice UCC 1-207

Mom booted from hospital as baby snatched. Now judge told to ignore med center behavior, social worker's 'patently false' claim

 Re-posted from WND

"A social worker who called police after apparently making up a story about a possible danger to a newborn, and the hospital that then gave a shot to the infant based on the social worker’s story, now want a federal court to ignore their actions.
According to the Home School Legal Defense Association, which brought a case against the Hershey Medical Center and social worker Angelica Lopez-Heagy on behalf of Scott and Jodi Ferris, the defendants have asked the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania to dismiss the claim.
HSLDA confirms it is working on a rebuttal to the request for dismissal.
“HSLDA is in the process of responding to these motions, ensuring that the Ferris family receives the justice they deserve,” the organization told WND today.
The hospital and social worker’s agency in Pennsylvania declined to respond to WND requests for comment, and the court said the case details were not available online. Dauphin County, where the incident took place, also declined to respond to a WND request for comment.
HSLDA said the defendants want the court to dismiss the case and ignore the fact that the social worker and hospital worked together to administer vaccinations to a newborn over the objections of the parents.
That’s not all.
According to the court filing and a report from Michael P. Farris, chairman of the HSLDA, the case developed this way:
The couple had been planning a home birth with a midwife, but the labor started earlier than expected, so the midwife encouraged them to go to the local hospital. Baby “Annie” was born in the ambulance in the parking lot.
While the hospital took charge of the newborn, Jodi began asking the nurses about her baby, and then the hospital staff gave her an injection without telling her what it was.
Eventually a doctor told her that Annie scored a 9 on a physical exam applied to newborns known as the APGAR test. A score of 8 or higher is considered healthy. (It is unclear when the score was given since she was in the ambulance at birth.)
But shortly after this a different doctor told Jodi that Annie was “very sick” and would need to stay in the hospital. This doctor’s comments were accompanied by an explanation of his disdain for midwives saying, “Too many people think they know what they’re doing.”
Then, after several hours, another staffer told Scott and Jodi that Annie would have to stay in the hospital for 48 to 72 hours for observation, explaining the law requires that. (There is no such law in Pennsylvania.)
Shortly later, a government social worker named Angelica Lopez-Heagy came into Jodi’s room announcing that she was there to conduct an investigation. Jodi asked to know the allegations, and the social worker refused to answer.
When Jodi questioned that, the social worker said, “Since you’re not going to cooperate, I’ll just go and call the police and we can take custody of the baby.”
Jodi agreed to cooperate, but then the hospital asked to check Annie’s white blood cell count and to perform a strep test. Jodi agreed to the testing. Then the hospital demanded that they give Annie a shot for Hepatitis B. Jodi said that she would agree only if they tested her or Annie to see if either of them were positive. If so, then she was quite willing to have the shot for Annie. The hospital claimed that they had forgotten about this earlier when it was still possible to test that day, and that they needed to give the shot anyway without any testing.
Farris wrote: “Put yourself in Jodi’s shoes at this moment. You gave birth that morning in an ambulance. The hospital has made wild and conflicting claims about your baby’s health all day long. You are exhausted. You are in pain. Your husband has gone to check on your children. And a social worker who has threatened to take your baby into police custody is standing in your hospital room demanding that you make an immediate decision.”
Jodi asked that the decision wait until her husband returned, and the social worker then produced a “safety plan” and demanded a signature.
When Jodi said she wanted her husband and an attorney to review the plan, the social worker “left the room and called the police. Without a court order they took custody of Annie, immediately claiming that she was suffering from illness or injury – a patently false claim,” HSLDA said.
While the hospital administered the unauthorized Hepatitis B shot for the newborn, the police “made Jodi Ferris get up out of her hospital bed and escorted her to the entrance – they were expelling her from the hospital because she had not signed the ‘safety plan,’” HSLDA reported.
Her husband was at the entrance, and both were escorted off the grounds – without their child. HSLDA reported the hospital allowed Jodi to return every few hours overnight to nurse the baby, so she was forced to spend the night in a car in a nearby parking lot.
“You read that right. They kicked this mother out of the hospital, and in order to be close enough to feed her child, she had to sleep in the car,” HSLDA said.
When the issue went before a judge the next morning, the judge returned the child to the parents.
“It is not a crime to ask questions about the well-being of your child. It is not a crime to ask for testing to ensure that a procedure is needed before it is done. It is not a crime to be a protective mom,” HSLDA’s report said.
“It is a moral offense of the highest order to kick a mother out of a hospital and to seize her child on the day of her birth simply because a mom wanted to have her husband read a legal document before she signed.”
The HSLDA said it took on the case because of the significant parental-rights issues involved.
“We are tired of seeing the erosion of parental rights in virtually every area of life,” Farris said. “Parental rights in medical cases have an impact on broader parental rights, including education decisions. And the plain fact is this: If we don’t fight for parental rights, it is probable that our rights will be eroded bit by bit until there is nothing that remains.”
A special campaign has been assembled by HSLDA to fund the court case, since the organization will not bill its homeschooling constituents for such a case."

*The posts made in this blog are of our opinion only* Without Prejudice UCC 1-207