Let's Get Honest! Absolutely Uncommon Analysis of Family & Conciliation Courts' Operations, Practices, & History

Identify the Entities, Find the Funding, Talk Sense!

Here Come Da Psychologists & Mediators. . . To help return Mr. Thompson’s “wife” to her right mind. Or, she could do the jail thing, instead.

with 3 comments

How many psychologists can you count in this case? Or was it Psychiatrists? And when are the rest of you on the sidelines going to get angry about this “insane” practice?

Where is the “leading Australian psychiatrist’s report” [apparently court-ordered diagnosis??]  that gave this poor, distraught Dad rights and public sympathy, and a high profile that no MOTHER got who’s had her kids legally kidnapped through the courts, or illegally by the father(s). I instead of the nation(s) hunting THEM down with psychiatry, Internet, and Interpol, they simply let it slide.

When did the press become lackeys of this system and why aren’t they REPEATEDLY (like me) pointing out that something’s wrong when a woman has been judged publically, but indicted privately.

(see my last post).

Where’s his first wife? Did they have kids? If you are there, please say something!

In this report, as well as in the photo of the foursome I posted yesterday, Mr. Thompson refers to her as his “wife.” Yet indicators are — first of all, dude, she doesn’t want to live with you! Second, we read “wife” and “former wife.” The word only means “ownership.” In the current global culture, this word has become meaningless, and was most certainly exploited.

Kidnap mother may escape jail in new deal

Paola Totaro, Amsterdam

September 12, 2010

The mother of abducted boy Andrew Thompson – under arrest in Amsterdam and facing a prison term in Australia – could be offered a “get out of jail free” card, under a new system to resolve international custody battles.

A new form of cross-border mediation, tested in the Netherlands, will provide Melinda Stratton with a last-ditch chance to avoid criminal charges – and help parent her little boy – if she can co-operate and come to a binding, workable agreement is accepted by his father, Ken Thompson.

[sentence grammar off, but its intent is clear — to bring her to her knees under threat. This same practice is used in the United States towards (a) domestic violence offenders and (b) child support deadbeat Dads, to downgrade the meaning of criminal activity, typically towards women. Mediation works when there is actually a balance of power, genuine acceptable options, and TWO willing participants willing to work it out. This is nothing of the sort. It’s “threat therapy.”]

This system, thrashed out over two days under intense specialist mediation with a team of counsellors and lawyers, must be agreed to by both parents – and becomes a legally binding order in both the Netherlands and Australia.

Mr Thompson, met a team of psychologists in Amsterdam yesterday and drove to The Hague to meet the legal expert on the Hague conventions who is to manage the complex legal processes needed to return the six-year-old to his father.

It is now likely that he will need to remain in the Netherlands for at least three months as custodial orders from Australia are translated into Dutch and given effect in the local courts. These will allow the legal handover of Andrew while extradition proceedings against his mother unfold. Ms Stratton faces criminal charges and up to 13 years in prison in Australia if she refuses to participate in cross-border mediation system.

This could even result in the boy remaining in the Netherlands with his father as the legal processes unfold there while his mother is extradited to Australia to face charges.

Mr Thompson said yesterday he understood an agreement could be enforced very quickly – perhaps within a fortnight – if there was co-operation between the two parents to come to a resolution in the interests of the child.

Ms. Stratton/Thompson could not have said MORE plainly, and by her actions demonstrated, that there are serious allegations against Mr. Thompson. The public and press are NOT told what these are, but a person of reasonable intelligence might deduce that this woman does not appear to be hard up for another partner, should she wish one, or for supporting herself independently. Perhaps her psychological “problem” is called Mother Able to Decide — meaning per se “M.A.D.” IF allegations are true, best interest of child is no contact or only supervised contact with the father. IF they are false, best interest of child might then be co-parenting.

He has yet to see his child but insists that he bears no malice towards his wife and, while deeply anguished by the events of the past 2ÌÌ [???] years, simply wants to “be a dad to Andrew, to be in his life to love him and to give him back the human rights that were taken away from him“.

Wait a minute. His wife? [My ex went through this also, repeatedly calling me his wife, while living with someone else and arguing with authorities for his right to disobey standing court orders.]

Please. Everyone consider the current U.S. President (among others) who was raised by his mother. Also, Fatherhood Expert Ronald Mincy, Ph.D., apparently ditto. Did you notice the “Ph.D.”??? Perhaps mothers can do all right, if the word were still acceptable to use in public apart from the words “paranoid” and “facing criminal charges.”

Mr Thompson, visibly relieved after his day with lawyers and psychologists, said he believed Andrew’s was the first case worldwide in which the internet had been used successfully to track down an abducted child.

It’s time for our society to start considering their collective responsibility for allowing the courts to become psychology-normative, and administering threat-therapy instead of justice. If this continues, someday it might be YOUR turn for reasoned civil disobedience (which this case sounds like, to me, and the “wife” states it was). And then who will speak up for you?

Europeans are sometimes just too obedient, as if this solves problems. You know what other population was characterized that way? Rwandans.

We did it on a shoestring and so many fantastic people have helped me. I lived on less than 50 euro a day for the past four months – and I found my son.

He lived on 50 euros a day for 4 months, and got a lot of public support, empathy, publicity, and eventually, they did the work for him, turning in this mother. A conference of mayors of major U.S. cities has concluded that domestic violence is a major source of homelessness. I know women whose wages are being garnished below survival level, whose disability benefits — the disability being related to serious injury by the father — are being garnished (below living level) and from this position, they advocate for contact with their children, and no charges any more serious than disobeying (without kidnapping) a court order probably as arbitrary as the mysterious one surrounding this case. Welcome to OUR world, Mr. Thompson — poverty in pursuit of justice, and our children. The difference being, when was the last time an abducting father was called “paranoid” and hunted down like an animal? Or jailed, when caught

“OK, my legal fees are horrendous … overdraft on overdraft on overdraft, and I don’t even want to think about my mobile telephone bill. But I could not give up. Ever. A young guy with the fire services built the FindAndrew website for me – and he had never done this before. I had the most amazing people helping me if I was in trouble with electronic banking or a lost card. I had emails, thousands of them, in support. I’ve got people around the world who saw my plight and felt something. I can’t thank them all enough.

He should thank the U.S. IRS, whose progressive income tax policy made it possible to accumulate astounding amounts of $$ for use by the likes of Wade Horn, “National Fatherhood Initiative,” Fathering Courts, Fatherhood.gov, and a complex web of federal grants promoting marriage — at any cost — throughout the land. This makes possible — when combined with astounding wealth from tax-exempt foundations — to restructure society. He should thank Presidents (in approximate order) Bush, Clinton and Obama for making sure this never stops, and also the Conciliation Law / AFCC folks in Southern California who learned early on how to defraud even the IRS with a judges’ slush fund and developed organization-morphing techniques to avoid accountability and cover up collaboration and conflicts of interests, from which we eventually got a worldwide ogranization to promote the viewpoints of pedophile and incest-friendly gentlemen as Richard Gardner and Warren Farrell (quite the psychologist these days).

He should thank his lucky stars, or if he subscribes to one of the three Abrahamic religions, he should thank whoever put the book of Esther into the canon, where a Gentile Queen told the king “No!” when asked to come forth and strut her stuff halfway through what was likely a drunken banquet. Some accounts say, she’d have had to disrobe. She indeed DID say “No!” (as the story goes) and so was replaced. The search went throughout the land for more submissive, nubile young women, who knew their place in life, lest ALL men might need to experience the horror of a wife saying “no!” and changing society.

What grateful Mr. Thompson with his team of psychologists and psychiatrists doesn’t seem to empathize with, or appreciate, is the position he put his “wife” (or former wife) and THEIR son in when he called in a court psychiatrist to counter the serious allegations that we aren’t allowed to know about. If he wanted a more docile wife, he shouldn’t have picked a tri-lingual MBA.

I hope, I really hope that my wife will co-operate and that we can find a way for Andrew. I will stay here for as long as it takes and until Andrew is ready to move on. I have an EU passport and no visa issues … It will take time to reintroduce the relationship. It has to be carefully managed.”

It is understood that the little boy now both speaks Dutch and has lived under a different surname.

Psychologists have made clear that the reintroduction must be slow and carefully supervised as it is not known what the little boy has been told during the years of avoiding authorities.

Mr Thompson, a former NSW deputy fire chief, cycled 6500 kilometres across Europe to raise awareness of international child abductions and to distribute bumper stickers with Andrew’s face and promote his website to try and find his boy.

An alert Dutch woman checked her suspicions about the little boy and his mother on the internet and Googled “missing children” and “Australia” and discovering he had been kidnapped. It was her decision to contact Dutch police that traced him and led to the arrest of his mother.

The Bitch. Does she know anything at all about this field? Did she forget about Ayaan Hirsi Ali? Does she know what happens when women lose their children in similar situations? It’s rare we get them back. Did she forget the Holocaust, and the label “Juden”??

(If I were able to put my case details on this blog, you might understand the sentiment.)

Take Heed — the press is owned, for the most part. I found only ONE press (as opposed to blogs, which are many) stating that this mother might have had a legitimate reason for fleeing. The Internet WAS developed originally as part of a military technology; now we see some of its real purposes — nowhere to hide. Citizens (GLOBAL citizens) must be trained how to think, act, and report on each other, and call in the authorities — lawyers, psychologists, and of course police. Remember the Gulag. You’re in it.

IF laws were enforced equally, with similar amount of effort as Mr. Thompson put in, I wouldn’t be so “vociferous” (mouthy) for the other possible interpretation of this case.

EVERY United States citizen ought to examine some of the fatherhood sites, and the federal grants system, and start demanding accountability. Sleep less. You can do it! Get religion out of government; and part of government is education. Learn to barter, and minimize taxes all round. I seriously considered (as to education) a requirement that all parents, without exception, should educate their OWN offspring up to a certain level (far above what the government currently requires them to) and the public schools should be shut down, so that adults and children can develop normal relationships with each other. If the neighborhoods retained some vitality, then, perhaps — just perhaps — people might KNOW each other well enough to stick up for an abused wife, or child — and stop dreaming that someone else they pay, funded from a distant centralized government, might be doing the job without indoctrination about what is the “appropriate” psychological norm.

Which brings me to this page by Charles Pragnell, whom I quoted yesterday, on this same case:

Are you an `Appropriate’ person?

A Huge Hidden Iceberg of False Accusations of Child Abuse

ByCharles Pragnell January 04, 2007

The last decade has seen an insidious drive by the British government to turn the country into a totalitarian regime marked by the unwarranted and unnecessary intrusion and interference in family life by agents and employees of the State. This has been done under a perverse pretext of protecting children and a belief system within governmental departments that children need protecting from their parents and that the State can raise children better than parents or at least they can transfer large numbers of children to the care of the “approved” substitute parents as part of a latter-day social engineering experiment.

Britain is not becoming what politicians term, a Nanny State and the concept of welfare services being a `Safety Net’ no longer applies. It is much more sinister than that. A Nanny State is driven by a benign altruism whilst the present changes are being driven by an insidious and malignant ideology reminiscent in some respects of the Stalinist regime in Russia. “We know what is best for you all” is the mantra of the faceless bureaucrats inside the respective government departments to which can be added, “but it will be painful for some of you who will not or cannot change to fit in with our Utopian dream!”

The ill-defined boundaries of what is `appropriate’ and what is `Inappropriate’ behaviour of members of the general population, are now being constantly driven back by psychologists, psychiatrists, social workers, doctors and nurses and all of those other professionals involved in child protection work. They in turn are driven more by the alluring seduction of fame and status within the profession for creating a new theory of child abuse, rather than a compassionate concern for the safety and welfare of children. A successful adopted theory of child abuse can rapidly lead to demigod status as has been seen on several occasions albeit some of those demigods careers and reputations now lie in ruins as the country begins to awake to their deceptions.

He is writing her about parents (plurall) vs. child protective services.  It’s a blend, when the situation comes to divorce, though.  In any conflict, whatsoever, here comes the STATE, and in their trail, are psychologists.

Let me explain, a little, how this “EVERY CHILD NEEDS BOTH PARENTS, REGARDLESS …” works out, already, in cultures where divorces is a crime, as is adultery.  And European,  Australian, Western, “developed” countries need to accept and openly acknowledge that their present-day psychologists are NOT too far a cry from this:

This mother, an Egyptian Coptic Christian, wished she had listened to her daughter.  Now it’s too late:

Among Egypt’s Christians, few question Church rule

ALEXANDRIA, Egypt — When Irini Ibrahim, a young Coptic Christian woman, floated the idea of divorce from a husband she said was abusing her, her parents immediately opposed it, reminding her of the Biblical vow, “What God has joined together let no man put asunder.”

So the 25-year-old Ibrahim entered “reconciliation sessions” with her husband Rizk Kands, moderated by a priest. In April, the priest anointed Ibrahim and Kands with sacred oil, pronouncing their union healed.

Hours later, Ibrahim’s battered body was found in an Alexandria hotel room the couple had booked for a sort of second honeymoon. Kands, an Egyptian who also holds U.S. citizenship, fled to the United States, charged by an Alexandria prosecutor of strangling his wife after slamming her against the wall and toilet. Kands’ trial opens Sept. 21. He will be tried in absentia.

The case sparked shock and grief among Egypt’s Coptic Christians. But it did not bring much soul-searching over the Coptic Orthodox Church’s almost total ban on divorce. The ban makes divorce such a taboo among Christians that no matter how bad or unbearable the marriage, ending it is unthinkable in the face of the social shame.

Alternately, in Egypt, one could be part of the Muslim majority, and as a woman, one of several wives, and sharia law integrated with the law of the land:

But the “Western”  “liberalized” way, no matter the religion, is to use psychologists, psychiatrists, and just hunt her down, and make a public, press scandal of it.  This is called separation of church and state (in the US, a thing of the past) lest these newfangled concepts get a toehold, and infect other women with thinking that there is a safe place somewhere to raise  a child safely.

Mr. Thompson, I”m sorry, but your story lacks credibility.  Congratulations for your persistence, but don’t expect me to believe you really believed she was paranoid.  You haven’t accepted that she left you, as witnessed by continually calling her your wife. and an “in” with the press does NOT substitute for facts, or shouldn’t, in the public eye.


A mother who was labeled “paranoid” on several levels, and ignored when I told authorities the father was going to abduct, as well as after he did.

Fathers have religion AND government behind them.  Mothers are not even close, yet.  And we don’t start all those wars, either.

Written by Let's Get Honest|She Looks It Up

September 11, 2010 at 6:56 pm

3 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. Well, if this man was wise, he will not want to separate the little kid, who doesn’t even know him from his mother, and slowly buold the relationship up. By removing the kid in the manner that it has happened, the kid will suffer lifelong damage and enormous human suffeirng in his years to come. This man should hand the kid back to the mother, and ditch all family court processes..and this to me will be only test for his love and respect for his son’s growth and development..and nothing else..and evidence that he is a non abusive parent. Is he happy for the punishment the poor mother is going to suffer?

    {{LGH in-comment reply:}}
    This man has made it very clear he is emotionally bonded to his son, but does not respect that bond in his own son’s mother, which is typical of an abusive relationship. He has exploited people’s natural sympathies while I have seen nothing in print to see what options this woman had other than hang around being labeled paranoid and try to clear that label (while co-parent with the man who called in someone official — who hides behind the court — in a report, which I’ve not seen in print — but no problem spreading the assessment around internationally.)

    I appreciate your comment, but your reading of this man as “unwise” is off. He is wise; he helped turn his (former) wife into a fugitive and is punishing her. This woman now has a criminal recrord, before which she had a dubious mental health record. The few words she got in edgewise (to Caroline Overington of the Australian?) speak well enough for her.

    I have visited safety4parentsandkids (another comment, you asked to post blogs here?) and recommend you work on that Family Law Reform group [cited in this article] in Australia, who is fronting Glenn Sacks, from the U.S., in radio broadcasts, the “child alienation” theme and is clearly father’s rights if you look beyond the front pages. And supporting the coalition that Freda Briggs called together, above. Your work is cut out for you.

    I will continue to expose the groups FUNDING these human-rights and due-process-offensive policies, many of which relate back directly to certain religious sects, but some are simply about greed and child-trafficking. I will also continue, as I can, to blog about when, where, by whom, and for WHAT ($$)(publicity, prestige, etc.) certain “nonprofit” groups, or consultants in “domestic violence” fields have either profited from our distresses, or co-opted the themes lest anyone discover the inbreeding of personnel (and habits) between the supposedly contrary and supposedly opposing viewpoints. They are negotiating truces on issues where there can be no truce–wife-assault and child-abuse. The loser is the legal process.


    September 12, 2010 at 6:57 am


    “A Nanny State is driven by a benign altruism whilst the present changes are being driven by an insidious and malignant ideology reminiscent in some respects of the Stalinist regime in Russia. “We know what is best for you all” is the mantra of the faceless bureaucrats inside the respective government departments to which can be added, “but it will be painful for some of you who will not or cannot change to fit in with our Utopian dream!”

    I disagree. A nanny state is a disarming term, and generally the infancy of a totalitarian state. Who could fear a “nanny” who has the “best interests of the child” at heart?

    Yeah, right. This concept of a Nanny State may be of British origin (I’m not historian enough to know), where upper classes had nannies, and lower classes were the nannies. Similarly, the U.S.A. were “The Colonies” and eventually lost that status, but not, really, the idea of “innately superior due to birth, race, or religion,” as witnessed for writing The Declaration of Independence (yes, an inspired document) but failing til forced and then, a bad idea never dies — that All Animals are Equal, but SOME animals are more equal than others. And to distinguish those “some,” how about some irrelevant-to-character but easy-to-identify label — like race, GENDER, or wealth.

    Liberty has to be LOVED, and appreciated, and defended according to a clear standard or ideal, or it is gone, til you wonder where. Refusing to allow mothers who have suffered abuse or violence actually raise their own children, or protect them from the same, is a clear indication that the states (plural) wish to control WHICH values are inherited from Generation to Generation, which can ONLY be done by controlling the human spirit from womb to tomb, AND controlling (or, at least, dominating) the PRESS. See First Amendment, Bill of Rights, U.S.A.

    (I’m obviously simply preaching in a comment to my own blog, but technically, it’s easier — and less likely to be lost during a save– than a fresh post.)

    ALSO, (my current understanding of this situation): The USA HAS to be “commodified” and made, with other “northern” nations, into a land of consumers — from material goods they don’t need, to entertainment they can’t do themselves locally, to mental health professionals, and ESPECIALLY to drugs, including but very much NOT limited to, anti-psychotics, including some which I recall MAY have been implicated in school shootings and murder-suicides.)

    One possible reason this has to happen is economic international bodies such as the IMF, where certain economies are made into export economies, rather than self-sufficient, in order to pay off their own debt. If these countries are making cheap goods for us to buy, then we must be trained to buy them and keep the world stable, thus being made participants in oppressing other nations, and undermining our own local needs, and values. Values tend to pale when there’s danger and/or hunger and/or a relative at imminent risk.

    And law, conducted by professionals who have closer relationships with each other than they do with most clients, who are a revolving door (although in the case of family law, a much slower one, lasting years) tends to pale when economics are given higher priority.

    Conducting any discussions of family law cases without — almost each and every time — incorporating the dynamic of the child support system, which is the monetary part — and which ties (in US) the legal system to the welfare system — just doesn’t make sense.

    In the above case, if Mr. Thompson “wins,” Andrew Thompson loses, no quotes. Maybe neither of these adults needed anything financially, but in similar cases, similar procedures/values means that the child loses the income of one parent, who is sent to jail, before which he/she/they lose the income of BOTH parents, who are litigating, or (in this case) seeking to locate the absent parent. Meanwhile SOCIETY loses, while sometimes one parent is driven to seek help from IT, and whatever valuable non-monetary contributions either parent (Mr. Thompson as a fireman, Ms. Stratton in her former work), inventions, value, support, and WORK would have otherwise contributed.

    SOCIETY pays again (meaning, not all sectors, but those who pay taxes) in the form of the cost of a year, or more, in prison, which — see recent posts — IS a booming, and increasingly private corporate, business.

    I am opposed to any government (or religion) TELLING me or any woman, whether I or she must marry, or stay married, or how to divorce, so long as I am not abusing man, woman, or child and am endeavoring to stay gainfully employed AND can refrain myself from committing real crimes, as opposed to thought crimes.

    I do not “owe” my country to sacrifice the life of my children, and have been in my life, living so as to contribute, not hoard. Only when I got to a point of needing to protect physical life, did the legal structure which we are paying for all these years, help save it. And that, only temporarily — and not even as long as the initial restraining order was on. It helped me at a VERY high cost — for the later forfeiture of any contact with my own offspring, without having broken a court order or committed a crime, but for having spoken up against those (locally and in my case) who did.

    I am warning people who come in these footsteps to take a look at the past, and the progression, and the future, of where these systems are taking the world. Understand clearly that more than one religion thinks AND ACTS in terms of “other = hostile” and believes, literally, in one version or another of Armageddon. Whatever the neutral may think of this, you live alongside those who take it literally, and whose collective cultures see this as Good (and, generally, women as bad, or at best, perpetual children).

    Coming back to C. Pragnell’s statement that a Nanny State can be altruistic and benign — you are wrong. See “The Road to Serfdom,” written by Hayek, an Austrian man who lived and wrote between world wars I and II, and in Great Britain, tried to warn about this. Univ. of Chicago Press across the pond finally published him.

    Well, enough of my sentiments on this!


    September 13, 2010 at 7:38 am

  3. The “buffer zone” in my thought process – not the computer — lost a phrase out of this sentence, which without it reads poorly:

    “Similarly, the U.S.A. were “The Colonies” and eventually lost that status, but not, really, the idea of “innately superior due to birth, race, or religion,” as witnessed for writing The Declaration of Independence (yes, an inspired document) but failing til forced…”

    The rest [and corrected wording] of the phrase “failing til forced” is:

    …Writing the Decl. of Indep. but failing to recognize specific people as full-status “men,”
    til forced to…

    Obviously I am speaking of the struggles to give first slaves, African-Americans, the vote, and AFTER that, and relatively recently (1776-1876-1976, women get the vote in 1920s, last state doesn’t ratify til 1948, Conciliation Code in California passed in 1939, enabling the entire family law system, and the “AFCC” I keep harping on, in its own “about us” page states some major changes and expansions dating to about 1963.

    [This just became “post-length,” but I’m putting it here anyway…]

    Picture a horizontal bar graph, a timeline, and the 3 rows (not columns, as in English, we read left to right, and most charts, LEFT = earlier, RIGHT = progressing forward [the opposite of political rhetoric, go figure!] in time.

    1776 DECL of INDEPENDENCE..1848 woman’s suffrage effort organizes a little more..1876 (100 years form 1776) (Civil War just over) . . . suffrage efforts suspended, and continued. Industrial Revolution, compulsory education movement being pushed based on collective fears of immigrant Catholics.

    Early 1900s, genocide of Armenians, in process of expansion of Ottoman Empire, and relief from the U.S., but resistance, for financial reasons, to actually CALLING it a genocide persist til the next century (early 2000s) even though by then we’ve had another one [with similar resistance by US on calling it a genocide til too late] in RWANDA. The Rwandan one as well has origins and ties relating to European colonial interests, Belgium (“EU, anyone?”). I am bringing this up on a post about ONE Australian woman who fled a marital situation, and the calling in of psychologists to hunt her down, because warlike natures and institutions breed war, and professions that feed off it. War breeds trauma and orphans (I know that sounds like an oxymoron) and displaced identities. I am SAYING that the treatment of mothers in the courts, endorsed internationally including even worse by the Obama Administration (if possible) than the previous two IS a literal war. Two major components of “war” (besides the destruction and bloodshed) are propaganda (“reframing reality”) combined with displacement and hostage-taking. Of any population MOST affected by ANY kind of war, it’s women of age to have children, or with young children. a.k.a. Mothers. Why have “M-W-M” mothers without men become public enemy #1?

    I learned some more about the Armenian situation only after acquaintance with someone whose grandfather lived in the area, after which I learned more by reading. FYI, history, in the American school system, is one of its weakest (and most politicized) subjects, along with reading and math and the expressive arts, with exceptions usually tied to wealth… See “The Burning Tigris” book.

    This takes a while, but the theme is human rights including all humans. Even the term “human” indicates a “versus animal” theme. Humans come in Men & Women. Parents come in Mothers and Fathers biologically, give or take a few per birth when it comes to advances in technology, i.e. surrogates and sperm donors). I think it’s better to use the word that includes a gender, as we ARE a gendered world, by institutions and religions, and financially.


    “n April 1915 the Ottoman government embarked upon the systematic decimation of its civilian Armenian population. The persecutions continued with varying intensity until 1923 when the Ottoman Empire ceased to exist and was replaced by the Republic of Turkey. The Armenian population of the Ottoman state was reported at about two million in 1915. An estimated one million had perished by 1918, while hundreds of thousands had become homeless and stateless refugees. By 1923 virtually the entire Armenian population of Anatolian Turkey had disappeared.

    The Ottoman Empire was ruled by the Turks who had conquered lands extending across West Asia, North Africa and Southeast Europe. The Ottoman government was centered in Istanbul (Constantinople) and was headed by a sultan who was vested with absolute power. * * * The Turks practiced Islam and were a martial people. The Armenians, a Christian minority, lived as second class citizens subject to legal restrictions which denied them normal safeguards. Neither their lives nor their properties were guaranteed security. As non-Muslims they were also obligated to pay discriminatory taxes and denied participation in government. * * * * Scattered across the empire, the status of the Armenians was further complicated by the fact that the territory of historic Armenia was divided between the Ottomans and the Russians.

    {{could also be applied to slaves, and women, and others, in historic U.S.}}

    In its heyday in the sixteenth century, the Ottoman Empire was a powerful state. *** Its minority populations prospered with the growth of its economy. By the nineteenth century [1800s, OK?], the empire was in serious decline. It had been reduced in size and by 1914 had lost virtually all its lands in Europe and Africa. This decline created enormous internal political and economic pressures which contributed to the intensification of ethnic tensions. * * *Armenian aspirations for representation and participation in government aroused suspicions among the Muslim Turks >>>who had never shared power in their country with any minority and who also saw nationalist movements in the Balkans result in the secession of former Ottoman territories. Demands by Armenian political organizations for administrative reforms in the Armenian-inhabited provinces and better police protection from predatory tribes among the Kurds only invited further repression.<<< The government was determined to avoid resolving the so-called Armenian Question in any way that altered the traditional system of administration. <<>>

    During the reign of the Sultan Abdul Hamid (Abdulhamit) II (1876-1909), a series of massacres throughout the empire meant to frighten Armenians and so dampen their expectations, cost up to three hundred thousand lives by some estimates and inflicted enormous material losses on a majority of Armenians. ”

    THAT’s what’s happening now in the courts! Women are being made an example of, because, yes, treating us differently WILL restructure society. Any push for rights or change, WILL have a backlash, but these issues are important. WHAT PRICE (and who pays?) to PEACE AT ANY PRICE? I think that the price should be commensurate with what any individual pushing “peace at any price” would be wanting to pay with his or her own offspring, housing, and income. And this should be put to the test somehow. But to push psychology on the world, basically, while failing to recognize that generations and centuries of tribal (a.k.a. after that, empire/religious) war is NORMAL — is a form of warfare.

    “Through methodically organized deportation, systematic massacre, deliberate starvation and dehydration, and continuous brutalization, the Ottoman government reduced its Armenian population to a frightened mass of famished individuals whose families and communities had been destroyed in a single stroke.

    “In all, it is estimated that up to a million and a half Armenians perished at the hands of Ottoman and Turkish military and paramilitary forces and through atrocities intentionally inflicted to eliminate the Armenian demographic presence in Turkey. In the process, the population of historic Armenia at the eastern extremity of Anatolia [TURKEY] was wiped off the map. With their disappearance, an ancient people which had inhabited the Armenian highlands for three thousand years lost its historic homeland and was forced into exile and a new diaspora.”

    “The cruelty characterizing the killing process was heightened by the fact that it was frequently carried out by the sword in terrifying episodes of bloodshed.

    US Congress voted relief, first known genocide help, that’ I’m aware of. Effect on young women & children:

    “Furthermore, for the survivors, their witnessing of the murder of friends and relatives with the mass of innocent persons was the source of serious trauma. Many younger women and some orphaned children were also abducted and placed in bondage in Turkish and Muslim homes resulting in another type of trauma characterized by the shock of losing both family and one’s sense of identity. These women and children were frequently forbidden to grieve, were employed as unpaid laborers, and were required to assimilate the language and religion of their captors.”

    YOUNG WOMEN & CHILDREN worldwide appear to be at risk in wars and genocides between ruling empires, often with religious basis, by virtue of being young women and children. They must often morph identity to survive. YES, this is relevant to “The Crisis in the Family Courts”!!

    From another site:

    “The Historical Record

    “The events in Turkey in 1915 clearly indicate “race extermination.” The historical evidence documenting the massacre of 1.5 million Armenians is beyond dispute and has been affirmed by U.S. Congresses and Presidents since Woodrow Wilson – who actually considered committing U.S. troops to the region. H. Res. 106 as well as a recently (though narrowly) passed Swedish Resolution succinctly details what can only be classified as genocide”

    Oct. 2007 (blog) article states Bush Admin warning that acknowledging this WAS a genocide could jeopardize US Interests in Near East and relationships with Turkey. Imagine a Bush affiliate saying something like that!


    House committee approves Armenian genocide resolution
    October 10, 2007

    “Top Bush administration officials are shifting into damage-control mode after a House committee narrowly approved a resolution that labels the killings of Armenians in Turkey during World War I as “genocide.”

    The House Foreign Affairs Committee passed the measure 27-21 Wednesday evening, even though President Bush and key figures lobbied hard against it.

    The Web site of Turkish President Abdullah Gul carried a statement calling the decision “unacceptable,” saying it “doesn’t fit a major power like the United States.”

    The economic-religious-power structures are rarely
    State Department spokesman Sean McCormack issued a statement expressing “regret” for the committee’s action, warning the resolution “may do grave harm to U.S.-Turkish relations and to U.S. interests in Europe and the Middle East.”

    For “U.S. interests” read “U.S. Wealth interests”

    Kurds got massacred, too:
    This site bears a logo, combining Muslim crescent with swastika:

    Monday, July 19, 2010
    Syria and Turkey massacre Kurds, world silent

    From the LAT’s Babylon and Beyond blog:

    . . .
    Another legal dissertation student in Auckland (2000)
    “Genocide in Kurdistan

    A dissertation presented in partial fulfillment
    of the Diploma in Legal Studies at the University of Auckland
    By Heval Hylan
    Auckland, November 2000”

    …The 20th century has witnessed the evolution of perhaps the most contemptible violation of state-perpetrated, international criminal law — that is, genocide. Genocidal behavior, however, has been routinely ignored in literature devoted to the discipline of criminology.

    No one is going to voluntarily ‘fess up to genocide, or having covered it up, let alone it having a religious, or simple greed basis.

    But tighter and tighter INTERNATIONAL controls, and more and more centralization of policy, enabled by a wider and tighter and tighter “net” (including via “Internet”) is NOT the answer.

    Such an answer presumes that adequately ethical enough people TO RULE THE WORLD exist, and that propaganda does not. Think a combo of your worst nightmare terrorists [Hitler, Stalin, et al.], remember the legacy of the Popes (!!) and add Rev. Sun Myung Moon (and “his wfe”), now in their 80s??

    Or, throw up one’s hands in informational paralysis (he said/she said) due to overload and wash your conscience of any responsibility for doing anything.

    The 20th century has witnessed the evolution of perhaps the most contemptible violation of state-perpetrated, international criminal law — that is, genocide. Genocidal behavior, however, has been routinely ignored in literature devoted to the discipline of criminology.

    “…The Iraqi government maintains that the genocide in Kurdistan is justified by the Quran Islamic Holy Book, although it publicly denies that this is its view. Genocide in Kurdistan is also ignored by the super powers for reasons of political interest.”

    Most war is sold under pretext of helping, and/or a religious cause as well.

    I think the genius of the U.S. COnstitution and Bill of Rights stands, but it gets lots in the translation.
    The phrase “think globally, act locally” makes particular sense to me, but in the course of my doing so (in my 20s, 30s, 40s) as I was taught: Mind Your Own Business, Work hard, Obey Laws, etc. — resulted in my ignorance of criminality in high places, and a good deal of how the world works. PROFESSIONALS (specialists) are typically subject to this mindset — it profits them, while the current systems remain.

    If one takes the evolutionary outlook (survival of the fittest) — which of course will draw the wrath of the creationists (and vice versa, should be acknowledged), the generalists and synthesists are better survivors, than “endangered species” whose “niche” is being destroyed.

    However, the discipline of mind, habit, and thinking in become a specialist in at least ONE field (or trade), particularly with one’s HANDS (we are humans, right? opposable thumbs and whatnot) and in more than one language AND culture (religions, and the associated arts, foods, etc. are in themselves a language) is necessary. This is why I had one post with the word “Flatlining.” Flatlining is a medical indicator of no pulse, or heartbeat, but I also mean by this flattening of perspective to Us/Them and applying that us/Them to real individuals with real differences within their own statistical profiles.

    What I see in this father’s behavior – behavior I couldnot, as a woman, engage safely in should my case go international; there is not enough moral, cultural support any more, nor would there typically be as serious consequences when someone is caught — and in the press, is a total obliteration, almost, of the fact that the mother (a) MIGHT and (b) probably DOES have a legitimate cause. I’m sure she couldn’t foresee the eventual outcome, but she certainly did weigh her options and choose what to her looked like the best one available to their son and herseslf. She is well read and obviously not the first woman to choose that option (and fail in it).

    It takes typically 9 months to gestate a baby, but only moments to conceive one. From the start, women are more heavily invested in their own offspring.

    Institutional failure to respect that, and to instead view women as tools to terrorize during war, by rape and hostage-taking, and to exploit economically by first devaluing, then commodifying and industrializing the raising of children (that IS a man’s world view, sorry) is a horrible waste of life energies.

    Women absolutely buy into this and support it, but what are their legitimate choices?

    Meanwhile, the Bible ends with characterizing the entire merchandising monopoly as a woman: “the whore of Babylon” and starts out with blaming the first woman, “Eve,” for being weak, and deceived, second in creation and second in chain of authority: God, Adam, Eve. But the first MURDERER narrated in this account was a son, not a daughter, Cain (Genesis). Inbetween, at times, entire patriarchal tribes are called, by God, also harlots. Go figure! Then (in these accounts) here comes the prophet, “son of God”/ man Jesus, who was as egalitarian as it gets in those days (a real anachronism, even from the century in which the gospels are now known to have been written) and breaks culture by speaking to women, acknowledging them as human beings, both pre- and post-resurrection. His character broke nearly all the traditional molds (including propagation, land ownership, etc.); he didn’t qualify for the “Sanhedrin,” not being a “family man” and ended up crucified by Romans.

    Maybe that crucifixion, assuming it happened, had as much to do with breaking those stereotypes towards women as towards religious authorities who had aligned themselves with political ones, out of survival.

    (Note: I can only speak to traditions I’m familiar with and mean no offence to others in this —except the psychological/political connection. Well, take that back, yes I DO mean to offend (and so, wake up!) some entrenched mindsets… I remain a voracious reader, and most like to read books by people who have converted from one religion, or viewpoint, to another, and I prefer nonfiction, though realize that there’s a lot of fiction in “nonfiction” and a lot of truth in fiction. I just find the “nonfiction” more interesting and more directly tied to the world I live in.

    A false openness is far worse than an overt secrecy.
    Again, we need to stop crucifying fugitives, and stop enabling a global terrorism through multiple means.

    IF laws were enforced fairly as to gender, THEN, I’d side more with Mr. Thompson’s case.

    Also, there are ALMOST NO human contracts or interactions not affected by economy. The world needs rebalancing, certainly, but this must come from individuals, not top-down, and not from mobs. The profit motive is not a bad motive. The patronizing attitude IS, particularly when it’s a facade for the profit motive.

    By the way, this blog is not altruistic. I have no real contact with my offspring, and am trying to add my trail to the “chemtrails” of information that may give them a clue to their past and mother (should interest and opportunity arise) and I’m trying to spread some alternate views, some of which may “spawn” a different style of thinking. (Word choice intentional)

    (Enough for one comment, already!)


    September 13, 2010 at 9:57 am

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: