I started reviewing the definitions of “intransigence” and decided I’m happy with mine.  I’m looking at the language of the  AFCC crowd — and have come to understand how true, how true, that Ph.D. is — in SOME fields — simply  “Piled Higher and Deeper.”

These words are admirable, in SOME circumstances.  However, AFCC seeks to characterize them as always BAD (and not to be applied to themselves):

“INTRANSIGENT”

Synonyms: adamant, adamantine, bullheaded, dogged,hard, hardened, hardheaded,

hard-nosed, headstrong,immovable, implacable, inconvincible, inflexible, obstinate,

mulish, obdurate, opinionated, ossified, pat, pertinacious,perverse, pigheaded,

self-opinionated, self-willed, stiff-necked, stubborn, unbending, uncompromising,unrelenting, unyielding, willful (or wilful)

I went looking for yesterday’s reference to an AFCC conference describing people like myself*

(I’m intrinsically intransigent in believing that criminal matters shouldn’t be handled in family court cases, that domestic violence should be handled as misdemeanor or felony ONLY and not in civil courts, and that there’s absolutely no excuse for the present state of affairs from top to bottom in the US government.  Also I feel that of all the slave/master relationships it’s possible to inflict on an entire nation, the ones involving judges — while perhaps not the largest — are among the worst. Because usually, it takes a judge to send a person away (or refuse to when evidence says, do it!).

And I just recently found that in 2003 a women was incarcerated nearly six months for attempting, respectfully, to speak at a public hearing on judicial confirmations, even when it became clear there was no intention to take comments from her exercising her constitutional rights in public.  And then I learned that her MOTHER, an attorney, had gotten disbarred for protesting the SALE of judgeships between the Republican and Democrat party (bosses) in New York State.  (See recent posts).  In fact, here she is in 2007 protesting the NY Senate’s Reappointment of Court of Appeals Chief Judge Judith Kaye.

In fact, here’s a segment of it explaining the sale of judge-ships, from this utterly intransigent person, Doris L. Sassower.  I have to meet her some day, I like her attitude.  (For a more readable version, click on the link.)

TESTIMONY OF DORIS L. SASSOWER

I am testifying here today in an individual capacity in opposition to Senate confirmation of Governor Spitzer’s reappointment of New York Court of Appeals Chief Judge Judith S. Kaye on behalf of myself and other innocent victims of her official misconduct- both in her judicial capacityas Chief Judge of our state’s highest court and in her administrative capacity as headof the Unified Court System.

Chief JudgeKaye’s on-the-jobperformance,which, after all, is the “acid test” of her mettle, is one of demonstrable corruption, as evidenced by what she did to me professionally and personally in a case that came before her at the Court of Appeals six separate times as I attempted to obtain appellate review of a completely lawless,retaliatory, politically-motivated “interim” suspension of my law license by the Brooklyn-based Appellate Division, Second Department.

. . .In September 1990 I became pro bono council to the Ninth Judicial Committee, predecessor of the Centerfor Judicial Accountability, Inc. (CJA), foundedand chairedby Eli Vigliano, Esq. to challenge a 1989 written judicial cross-endorsementdseal between the Republicanand Democraticparty leadersof the Ninth Judicial District which guaranteedthe judicial electionof sevencross-endorsed nomineesoverathree-yearperiod,thecross-endorsed nomineefor WestchesterCountySurrogateamongthem. Thetermsandconditionsof thedeal included contracted-forearly judicial resignations to createjudicial vacanciesand a pledge by thejudicial nomineesto splitjudicial patronage.In 1989andthenagainin 1990,thedealwas implementedat illegally-conductedjudicial nominatingconventions,with perjuriouscertificates of nominationfalselyattestingto compliancewith ElectionLaw requirements.In 1990,aspro bono counsel, I filed a lawsuit under the Election Law, entitled Castracan and Bonelli v. Colavita, et al, challenging the deal as illegal, unconstitutional, and unethical, also contesting that year’s implementing judicial nominating conventions. The transcendingissue was the constitutionallyof judicial cross-endorsements which I contended disenfranchised the voters, with the politically-controlled judicial nominating conventionsfurther violating the sanctity of the franchise.

The record of the lawsuit shows that it was “thrown” by a fraudulent judicial decision in Supreme Court/Albany County and that such was affirmed by the Appellate Division, Third Departmentin Albany. The judges at both levels were themselvesthe product of undisclosed multiple cross-endorsementsand/or endeavoring to benefit from cross-endorsementin future judicial elections.

It was less than a week after I announced in a New York Times Letter to the Editor that I was taking Castracan to the New York Court of Appeals that the Appellate Division, Second Department issued its June14,I99l order suspending my law license immediately, indefinitely, and unconditionally. The order gave no reason,made no frndings, was not preceded by any notice of petition and petition, setting forth charges. Nor was it preceded by any hearing or provide for any post-suspension hearing. Likewise, it failed to provide for any right of appeal.

As a result, I had to close up my law practice literally overnight, as I was informed that I was required to do so “within 24 hours” and to notifii all my clients that I could no longer represent them. This, of course, meant that I could not continue to represent the petitioners in the Castracan case. 

I run across the work of Judith Kaye from time to time investigating custody-related issues which transcend state boundaries.    FamilyCourtReform Yahoo group understands (like I noticed) she is basically carrying out an AFCC agenda.  They detail the involvement of Hofstra, Arnold T. Shienvold in particular (now in Pennsylvania, possibly then also) in mandating parent education programs upon UNwilling parents — just like other states had:

Re: Digest Number 1777 Kaye exposed! AFCC:  (Oct. 2003)

.So many Mother’s rights activists are impressed with Chief Judge Judith
kaye. But Don’t be…She marched up to the New York State Legislature to protest
the laws….But the facts are the facts..As the Chief Judge of the entire
State- she can authorize an investigation into the law guardians…court
appointed
experts and she can demand an investigation into all the contracts that the
Office of Court Administration that she controls……In fact it is the Office
of Court Administration that governs the rules and regulations of the
appointments of law guardians…...October 22 page B7 of the Metro section
Judge Judith Kaye office announces that In New York, judges in divorce cases
will soon be told to direct couples with children to attend parent education
programs.……And guess who is helping to push this along? “Our parents and
children would be better served if we had some money behing this,” said Andrew I
. Schepard, a law professor at Hofstra University on Long Island and a
founder of Peace, one of the largest and oldest parent education programs….Mr.
Schepard said that in other states, legislatures had required and financed the
programs,but that since the New York Legislature had not acted, the courts were
doing what they could. He added that studies showed that most parents
attended the programs unwillingly but then emerged believing they had learned
something valuable”.

Some Spring 2007 AFCC/Judith Kaye activity, typical of an activist AFCC Judge. Collaborate, Consolidate, and help some cronies get in charge of the consolidated structure.

New York Chief Judge Announces First Collaborative Family Law Center

New York Chief Judge Judith S. Kaye announced plans to establish the nation’s first court-based Collaborative Family Law Center in downtown Manhattan this year. {{WHY not think BIG???}}   Chief Judge Kaye made the announcement in her annual address on the judiciary, where she explained the current system involves, “too much money, too much delay, too much agony.”

AFCC member Hon. Jacqueline W. Silbermann, deputy chief administrative judge for matrimonial matters, said that the state’s embrace of the process would mean, “we will have court oversight of the collaborative law center, and very importantly, we will be providing lawyers for people who can’t afford lawyers to represent them.”

The center will offer training for attorneys, provide space for participants and connect families with professional services such as child development specialists, financial services, mental health services and substance abuse treatment. The project is intended to make divorce faster and less clostly for couples who want amicable settlements.

Chief Judge Kaye’s announcement was made following the submission of a report by the New York Matrimonial Commission, chaired by AFCC member Hon. Sondra Miller. The Commission was established in January 2004 to examine every facet of the divorce process in New York and recommend reforms to correct existing problems.

Judge Kaye’s complete 2007 State of the Judiciary report can be found at www.nycourts.gov/admin/stateofjudi- ciary/soj2007.pdf. More information on the Matrimonial Commission, including the commission’s report to Chief Judge Kaye, can be found on the New York State Unified Court System’s Web site at www.courts.state.ny.us/ip/matri- monial-commission/

FAMILY COURT REVIEW, March 2005 article, cited by Wiley.

(one can only see one page here — but it shows The Hon Kaye’s theme of “reinventing the family court in the new millennium,” and “detailed information on a model of parent education and FORENSIC EVALUATION (my caps) in cases of moveaway….  She is addressing the NCJFCJ — 

AND I QUOTE (see link, or if it displays, image below):   ”

The problem-solving model of adjudication for family courts that Chief Judge Kaye describes is the perfect paradigm of the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts (AFCC) and its members this new millennium.

Next sub-heading:  ‘FAMILY-FOCUSED DECISION-MAKING AND COURT-AFFILIATED PARENT EDUCATION PROGRAMS”

This model is no “paradigm of AFCC” — it IS AFCC’s paradigm, a top-down change forced on the public WITHOUT its legitimate, considered input in an open forum — and (must be coincidence) it just so happens to bring a nice business stream to AFCC membership.  This is not exactly new material for AFCC, it’s simply developed over time, and it takes time to position one’s judges at the top decision-making level of state-level courts, and then in nationwide conferences, point to success of forcing the model in ONE state to why ALL states should do this.  After all, we are only helping the families and children, right?

GRRRrrr!!!   This type of forcible transformative change is why we have a Constitution & Bill of Rights — to keep deeply held religious views (including views about “family”) from becoming the national standard.    We can see from Doris Sassower’s 1990 example how such a Judge is likely to view her role in suppressing dissent (i.e. “conflict”) among professionals, not just helpless to resist families and their kids!

Once in place, an activist AFCC judge is going to bring on, honor, promote and help publicize an AFCC crony.  This is from 2002 and shows The Hon. Judith Kaye doing this to Jo Ann Pedro-Carroll:

Psychologist Honored for Outstanding Work in Public Service

Please carefully read the career-curve of (now Dr.) Joann Pedro-Carroll — first, she starts testing theories on elementary school kids (that’s FYI, probably what a good deal of elementary schools are for, to start with — captive audience for doctoral students to test theory on, and help them get their Ph.D.’s after which theory becomes practice….).  I’m posting it all — and notice who was involved in expanding from ELEMENTARY SCHOOL to DIVORCING PARENTS and finally, she gets the knighthood from the Chief Judge.  (In all this time, has she divorced and/or raised children herself??)

Please pay attention — this is basically the model.  May vary from state to state, and this doesn’t cover federal funding.  But this is your basic practice.  I’m not going to look up every organization (probably most of them nonprofits, or resources within the Univ.), but will underline them.

JoAnne Pedro-Carroll, associate professor of psychology and psychiatry at the University of Rochester and director of programs for Families in Transition at the Children’s Institute, will be honored by the American Psychological Association with its 2001 Award for Distinguished Contributions to Public Service. She will receive the award Aug. 25 at the group’s convention in San Francisco.

For more than 20 years, Pedro-Carroll has helped children deal with the strains of their parents’ separation and divorce.

Where are the hordes of children giving testimonial to this, now adult, and saying what a difference it made in their lives? How they were missing this service and are so glad someone was omniscient enough to read their minds and provide it?

“Children need a safe, supportive forum in which they can share their feelings and experiences,” says Pedro-Carroll. “They need to clarify misconceptions, and learn effective skills for dealing with the challenges of changing family relationships.” Many times, though, that comforting environment is missing.

That is true.  That these programs are such a place, hasn’t been proved.

While working on her doctoral dissertation at the University in the 1980s, Pedro-Carroll developed the Children of Divorce Intervention Program, then implemented and evaluated it initially in five suburban schools. She joined the faculty in 1984, and began refining the program and produced six models, which more specifically meet the needs of children of different ages and from different cultural backgrounds. ***The program has since served thousands of children throughout the United States and worldwide.

**This essentially means, she got a basic model, and tinkered with it slightly (not as to its foundation, or assumptions), probably to meet cultural or ethnic categories matching grant availability.  But it’s ONE concept — the children need US to help them overcome divorce, and We (or, our model) is actually neutral.

In fact, few group-therapy or group ANYTHING (including classrooms) are neutral, let alone safe, places.  See “Using the Delphi Technique to Achieve Consensus How it is leading us away from representative government to an illusion of citizen participation” (1998, Eagle Forum.  Not that I’m normally a fan of the Eagle Forum, but the point is right:)  Interjection to explain:

 The Delphi Technique and consensus building are both founded in the same principle – the Hegelian dialectic of thesis, antithesis, and synthesis, with synthesis becoming the new thesis. The goal is a continual evolution to “oneness of mind” (consensus means solidarity of belief) -the collective mind, the wholistic society, the wholistic earth, etc. In thesis and antithesis, opinions or views are presented on a subject to establish views and opposing views. In synthesis, opposites are brought together to form the new thesis. All participants in the process are then to accept ownership of the new thesis and support it, changing their views to align with the new thesis. Through a continual process of evolution, “oneness of mind” will supposedly occur.

In group settings, the Delphi Technique is an unethical method of achieving consensus on controversial topics. It requires well-trained professionals, known as “facilitators” or “change agents,” who deliberately escalate tension among group members, pitting one faction against another to make a preordained viewpoint appear “sensible,” while making opposing views appear ridiculous.

In her book Educating for the New World Order, author and educator Beverly Eakman makes numerous references to the need of those in power to preserve the illusion that there is “community participation in decision-making processes, while in fact lay citizens are being squeezed out.”

The setting or type of group is immaterial for the success of the technique. 

THIS IS IMPORTANT:   It’s a technique used in cults, probably common to some shared religious experiences and without doubt that the AFCC conference also seem to use — as one can see by the astonishing LACK of variety of ideas coming out of them, along with next to no citizen participation.

This is in part why there is a need to transform the court system into collective-based group therapy with the related professionals as “change agents.”  In paticular I find it suspicious how many people want to get their hands on other people’s children in :psycho-educational classes.  (I don’t know that Ms. Sassower would agree with me in this, particularly as she has been a family attorney and might have been an AFCC member, for all I know.  However, I speak from the point of view of subject matter of these philosophies.  I do not espouse the use of human beings as subject matter for ANYTHING…..!)

In recent years, Pedro-Carroll has taken her preventive strategies to the place where adults end their marriages-court. {{Surprise surprise…}} She has teamed up with Supreme Court Justice Evelyn Frazee and family therapists, social workers, judges, lawyers and mediators {{i.e., AFCC membership categories}} to create A.C.T. – For the Children, a preventive program to teach separating parents how to reduce the stress of family changes on children and themselves. “The goal of the program is to protect children from becoming unwitting casualties of a divorce war,” she says. “We make the sessions proactive, preventive, and educational, because studies show that there are many ways that parents can help to put their children on pathways toward healthy adjustment.”

HERE’s where her friend or associated Chief Justice Judith Kaye comes in, I knew of this a while ago:

Pedro-Carroll, who has testified on behalf of children and families at congressional briefings and at the White House, was appointed by Chief Justice Judith Kaye to the New York State Parent Education Advisory Board earlier this year. She has been a fellow of the APA since 1993, and is a past recipient of local, state, and national awards. She was recently honored by AFCC, an international association of family, court and community professionals, with the Stanley Cohen Distinguished Researcher Award for innovative research with children and families.

AFCC judges (or elementary schools, etc.) provide the children and families, and AFCC or related professionals write up the research.  Such a deal!

Pedro-Carroll SHOULD be honored by AFCC — after all, she’s definitely working on their behalf, inbetween testifying at the White House that she’s really acting on behalf of families and children who, somehow, lost their voice and can’t speak. (or, weren’t informed of the hearings, or couldn’t get to them, etc.)  I wonder whose idea the Parent Education Advisory Board was to start with.  let me guess …..

How to keep a broken marriage
from breaking the kids

by JoAnne Pedro-Carroll, Ed ’73, Med ’74, nationally renowned child psychologist

How children respond to separation and divorce depends upon how well parents negotiate

the end of their relationship and create a solid foundation in the reorganized family. Here are some guidelines:

Contain conflicts. Ongoing conflict has a toxic effect on children. What children want most in the world

is to have the two people they love get along. Even when parents don’t stay together, children hope that

the fighting will end.

Strive for business-like co-parenting. Focus on the child’s best interest. In our business lives, we’ve all had to work with someone we didn’t like, but we had to figure out a way to work productively together. So we develop basic rules, such as being business-like, communicating in specifics and not leaving nasty messages on voice mail. The same model can be used effectively with co-parenting.

One word of caution:*** A cooperative model won’t work if one parent is violent, abusive or really mentally unstable. Safety needs to be the first concern.***

JoAnne Pedro-Carroll is associate professor of psychology and psychiatry, University of Rochester, N.Y.; director of programs, Families in Transition, the Children’s Institute; recipient of the American Psychological Association’s 2001 Award for Distinguished Contributions to Public Service; creator of a school-based intervention program used around the country; and an expert who has testified at congressional briefings and at the White House.

Link:

Dr. JoAnne Pedro-Carroll Web site

LinkedIn shows the career curve

ONE WORD OF CAUTION:  if there is anything that such membership (child psychologists, psychiatrists/court-affiliated educators/custody evaluators, mediators, etc. — AFCC sorts) does NOT believe, whatever they may post on websites, it’s that either parent being:

• violent
• abusive
• really mentally instable
• (or for that matter, even seriously dangerous, potentially lethal)

Should in any way exempt any families from being run through their programs, whether it be parent education, or mandatory mediation.  And the reason has nothing to do with what’s good for the families — simply put, this is their life’s work, and a good source of endless customers it is, indeed!  The more violent, abusive, mentally unstable, or other abusive behaviors either parent is showing, the more such services are mandated, until when the conflict escalates enough, if either parent actually cracks (which is likely to be the person trying to separate from such relationship, which is possibly WHY they divorced to start with) — they are even MORE likely to be punished by removal of their children and witnessing them given to the unstable parent.

That could not happen had not the family courts been started, and further restructured, in order to accommodate the endless indoctrination process.

here’s yet a little more (simply searched for the HHS link)  Pedro-Carroll & Cowan (the Cowans — probably this one –are out of Berkeley, California area, and like others, just love to study people, lots of people at all stages of life, and get published for declaring what people are, how they act, why they do it, and recommend policy, etc.  Hey, it’s a living, right?  (Did I mention they are very fatherhood-program friendly also:  See Council on Contemporary Families):

The Children of Divorce Intervention Program

Pedro-Carroll and Cowen (1985) evaluated the Children of Divorce Intervention Program, an intervention for elementary school age children that addressed 10 positive youth development constructs, including social, emotional, cognitive, and behavioral competencies, bonding, self-efficacy, resiliency, prosocial norms, opportunities for prosocial involvement, and recognition for positive behavior.

Ever notice how often the talk is about CONFLICT – like conflict is always bad; “Association for Conflict Resolution” and “High-Conflict Marriages” etc.   Because of the alleged constant conflict the bad parents are having, which is bad for their children, some big-bosses need to come in and stop the DISRUPTIONS.

(PAUSE to note how Elena Sassower’s attempt to participate in an Open Senate? Public Confirmation Hearing on some Bush-appointed judges, meaning that rubber-stamping process was noted, and protested — she was jailed for “DISRUPTING CONGRESS.”   Similarly, it seems that Elena’s mother, Doris L., in reporting and ACTING (as pro bono on a civil suit) to actually protest the sale of judgeships between Republican and Democrat parties in her state — which constituted freezing out the regular population — she IMMEDIATELY lost her license to practice law.  (The Board Giveth and the Judge Taketh Away  . .  ) WHY?  Because her exercise of legal rights DISRUPTED business as usual.

I have been very disturbed for a very long time here to consider how the United States has been divvied up into Federal HHS regions, and how state-wide practices are agreed upon in locations most people can’t get to, and in conferences they didn’t know took place, sometimes by organizations whose influence they aren’t aware of either — to determine a STATEWIDE policy set by major corporations and foundations.   There is no more doubt about this — that’s what the “membership association” when the membership is public employees — DOES.  Period  There are many of them.

Am I the only person concerned that an INTER-national organization (which AFCC is) is setting US agenda in the courts, yet our country has a fairly unique constitution which intentionally set itself apart from other countries, and its unique Bill of Rights? ???

That’s no accident.  The phrase “institutionalization of conflict” obviously comes to mind.  This conflict is from things that tend towards human freedom of choice and liberty, and those that lead away from it towards treating more and more individuals as only members of a family unit, or community, or other collective.  In this world INDIVIDUALS have no exercisable rights — they simply cannot withstand the collective force of corporations and foundations and government (with “the long arm of the law” to back it up).

So here’s a reference:  NORMAN DODD TESTIMONY ON REGIONALISM (Illinois, 1978):

In 1978 the legislature of Illinois created a committee to study Regionalism in Illinois. The Committee held three hearings – the first in Springfield, Illinois, April 11, 1978; the second in Chicago, July 10, 1978; and the third and final hearing in Edwardsville, on September 26, 1978. The following is a transcript – from the September 26th hearing – of the testimony of Mr. Norman Dodd, beginning on page 51 and ending on page 61. Mr. Dodd was chief investigator in 1953 for U.S. Congressman, B. Carroll Reece, whose committee (referred to as the Reece Committee) investigated tax-exempt foundations.

       The investigation was eventually narrowed down to about 10 foundations, chiefly among them being Rockefeller, Ford and Carnegie Foundations, their sub- foundations, and the Rhodes Scholarship Fund. Mr. Rene Wormser, Council for the Reece Committee subsequently wrote a book – titled “Foundations – Their Power and Influence“, which relates information uncovered during the hearings, as well as the difficulties and roadblocks encountered throughout. Congressman Cox had begun this process in the previous Congressional Session and died suddenly, bringing the hearings to a halt. Reece braved it out and the results are staggering to the mind of an American who once believed in a “free” America, under the Constitution.       In his book Wormser listed, among the major instruments of these foundations, the CFR, United Nations Association, Foreign Policy Association and Institute of Pacific Relations. From pg 200-201 of “Foundations…”: (remember, this was 1953)

“It would be difficult to find a single foundation-supported organization of any substance which has not favored the United Nations or similar global schemes; fantastically heavy foreign aid at the burdensome expense of the taxpayer; meddling in the colonial affairs of other nations; and American military commitments over the globe… The influence of the foundation complex in internationalism has reached far into government, policymaking circles of Congress and State Department“.

Including, obviously, the courts.  Things are simply organized differently than they used to be.  More . . . .

Regionalism is a plan which emanates from the United Nations, is taking place on a world scale, and its ultimate aim is to organize populations into groups small enough that no people can challenge a World Government. The 50 Sovereign States united in America have been unconstitutionally divided into ten federal Regions with populations a little over 20 million in each – comparable to the Regional population divisions in all other countries

REPEAT:  “ITS AIM IS TO ORGANIZE POPULATIONS INTO GROUPS SMALL ENOUGH THAT NO PEOPLE CAN CHALLENGE A WORLD GOVERNMENT.”  I have to agree.

This may be a repeat post, or segments of it may be repeat.  But he’s going to talk about Ford Foundation and Carnegie, specifically.  This is Norman Dodd testifying, experience he feels relevant to the  concept of regional government.

One of them… and these experiences are traceable to a position that I, at one time, held as the Executive Director of a Congressional Committee that was called upon to investigate the relationship of the economy, really, and wealth in this country to the purpose represented by the Constitution of the United States. As a result of that investigation, experiences began to accrue, and one of them stemmed from the entity – or the head of the entity – responsible for the proposition which you all now face called regional government.

OK, good question:   what relationship DOES the economy — and wealth — bear to the purpose represented by the Constitution of the United States?

(read on)

This individual was the head of the Ford Foundation, and this experience took place back in 1953. It took the form of an invitation from the President of the Ford Foundation to me to visit the Foundation’s offices, all of which I did, and on arrival, was greeted by the President of the Ford Foundation with this statement:

“Mr. Dodd, we have invited you to come to New York and stop in and see us in the hope that, off the record, you would tell us why the Congress of the United States should be interested in an operation such as ours”.

Before I could think of just exactly how I would reply, Mr. Gaither volunteered the following information, and these are practically in his exact words:

“Mr. Dodd, we operate here under directives which emanate from the White House. Would you like to know what the substance of these directives is?”  (I said, “Indeed, I would, Mr. Gaither”. Whereupon he then said the following:)

“We, here, operate and control our grant-making policies in harmony with the directives, the substance of which is as follows: We shall use our grant-making power so to alter life in the United States that it can be comfortably merged with the Soviet Union“.

This is a shocking, almost unbelievable attitude that you can run across. Nevertheless, this is what clarified the nature of the grants of this Foundation, which incidentally, of course, was the largest aggregation of privately-directed wealth in the United States.

JUST A LITTLE MORE….  He delivers the punch line towards the end — and recall, this was in 1978:

Now, the second experience that I would like to share with you… oh, and incidentally, it is the Ford Foundation’s grants which are responsible for the formulation of this idea of regional government, and also the idea that given regional government, we must, in turn, develop and accept and agree to a totally new Constitution which has already been drawn up,*** as was mentioned just a few minutes ago. [previous testimony]

***see “change agents / Delphi technique,” etc.  First, get a consensus that an idea is a good one.  Beforehand, have a plan.  This is EXACTLY what the AFCC has done with the family courts, parent coordination, model custody evaluations, and so forth.  It’s HOW this is done!  Thanks to the internet, we can see it in historical progression, at least in recent years …

The next experience ran this way. This followed an invitation from the head of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. [HOVER CURSOR] Also, it entailed visiting their offices, all of which I did.   [LINK to This ENDOWMENT’s DIVISION OF THE WORLD INTO ITS REGIONS — WITH A MAP] The invitation itself came because of a letter which I had written to the Carnegie Endowment, asking them certain questions which would clarify the reasons for many of the grants which they had made over a period of time. On arrival at the office of the President, I was greeted with this statement:

“Mr. Dodd, we have received your letter. We can answer all the questions, but it will be great deal of trouble. The reason it will be a great deal of trouble is because, with the ratification by the Senate of the United States of the United Nations Treaty, our job was finished, so we bundled all our records up, spanning, roughly speaking, fifty years, and put them in the warehouse. But we have a counter-suggestion, and that counter-suggestion is that if you will send a member of your staff to New York, we will give them a room in our library and the minuted books of this organization since its inception in 1908″.

My first reaction to that suggestion was that these officers had more or less lost their minds. I had a pretty good idea, by that time, of what those minute books might well have shown. The executives who made this proposal to me were relatively recent, in terms of their position, and I was satisfied that none of them had ever read the minutes.

To make a long story short – as short as possible – a member of my staff was sent to New York and spent two weeks there,** and did what they call “spot reading” of the minutes of this organization.

In a transcript, Mr. Dodd said that the (woman) attorney he sent over was so seriously disturbed by what she read that she couldn’t practice law again.  Apparently it really messed with her mind.

Now, we are back [[as to reading the MINUTES of this group] in the period of 1908, and these minutes reported the following: The Trustees of the Carnegie Endowment bring up a single question; namely, if it is desirable to alter the life of an entire people, is there any means more efficient than war to gain that end? And they discuss this question at a very high academic and scholarly level for a year, and they come up with an answer– there are no known means more efficient than war, assuming the objective is altering the life of an entire people.

So, in case you were wondering what war was about, there’s the answer.

That leads, then, to a question: How do we involve the United States in a war?

This was in 1909. I doubt if there was any question more removed, or any idea more removed from the minds of us, as a people, at that time than war. There were certain of what we call “intermittent shows” in the Balkans, and I also doubt if very many of us knew, really, where the Balkans was, or their relation or possible effect on us.

We jump, then, to the time when we are in a war, and these Trustees. . . oh, before that, the Trustees then answered the question of how to involve us in a war by saying, “We must control the diplomatic machinery of the United States”; and then that brings up the question of how to secure that control, and the answer is we must control the State Department.

Questions that, fair to say?, most  US citizens aren’t thinking about, with a view to strategy, and serious plans to enact it, on a regular basis.  But the Trustees of this Endowment most certainly were.  Which is why, such types of foundations and endowments, really should NOT be allowed to direct public policy — as they have been, including when the US does and does not engage in WAR!

However, as it says, Mr. Cox died suddenly in the middle of investigations . . . . . .

Now, at that point, research discloses a relationship between the effort to control the State Department and an entity which the Carnegie Endowment set up – namely, the Council of Learned Societies. **And through that entity are cleared all of the appointments – high appointments in the State Department, and they have continued to be cleared that way since then.

**”Jesus!” (i just linked to ACLS — the American Council of Learned Societies.  Read its history.  The guy is telling the truth!)  Same process this council of learned societies went through to control the U.S. Department of State, on a different level, AFCC uses to control the ENTIRE system and makeup of family courts (interlocking with juvenile, prison, and the US. Dept of HHS).    For example, they organized the Social Science Research Council:

Exploring New Methods and Subjects of Humanities Research

In addition to convening scholars for the purpose of peer review, ACLS has often organized committees of researchers to identify promising fields of study. The development of area studies in this country owes much to the impetus provided by ACLS. The original concept of organizing scholarly expertise around an area or cultural region grew out of the Council’s early work in Far Eastern and Slavic studies and language training, and the Council’s ability to bring a wide variety of humanists and social scientists together in interdisciplinary work made it possible to launch area studies and sustain them over an extended period. After World War II, when the practical need for such competence was evident, ACLS and the Social Science Research Council** joined to organize and develop African, Asian, Latin American, Near and Middle Eastern, Slavic, and East and West European studies.

The SSRC, from its site:

ABOUT THE SSRC

The Social Science Research Council is an independent, nonprofit international organization founded in 1923. It nurtures new generations of social scientists, fosters innovative research, and mobilizes necessary knowledge on important public issues

[Necessary to Whom?]

The SSRC’s records are stored in the Rockefeller Archive Center, Sleepy Hollow, New York.

SSRC: 80 Years of Impact

Early History

1923: Led by American Political Science Association** Charles E. Merriam, the Social Science Research Council (SSRC) holds its inaugural meeting.

1924: The SSRC begins planning its first committees to study such topics as Interracial Relations, Scientific Aspects of Human Migration, and the Eighteenth Amendment.

1928: The Advisory Committee on Business Research, whose members include New York State Governor Franklin D. Roosevelt, is founded, signaling the Council’s commitment to research on business practices, ethics, and industry relations.

1935: The SSRC establishes the Washington, D.C.-based Committee on Social Security. Its research is critical to the creation of the U.S. Social Security system.

BACK to Norman Dodd transcript, from a 1978 Illinois hearing on “regionalism”

Now, finally [in the reading of the Carnegie Endowment for Peace minutes], we are in a war. Eventually, the war is over, and the Trustees turn their attention, then, to seeing to it that life does not revert in this country to what it was prior to 1914; and they hit upon the idea that in order to prevent that reversion, they must control education in this country. They realized that that is a perfectly tremendous, really stupendous and complex task – much too great for them alone. So they approached the Rockefeller Foundation, with the suggestion that the task be divided between the two of them.

These trustees are truly thinking like monarchs — nay, like Popes, emperors — in planning the destiny of a country which DOES NOT BELONG TO THEM. (Yet…. — eventually……).

The Carnegie Endowment takes on that aspect of education which is a domestic in its relationship. These two run along in tandem that way, disciplined by a decision – namely, that the answer lies entirely in the changing of the teaching of the history of the United States. They then approached the… five of the then most prominent historians in this country with the proposition that they alter the manner of the teaching of the subject, and they get turned down flatly; [[HISTORIANS know the importance of their role]] so they realized then they must build their own stable of historians, so to speak.

They approach the Guggenheim Foundation, which specializes in Fellowships, and suggest to them that when they locate a relatively young potential historian, will the Guggenheim Foundation give that person a Fellowship, merely on their say-so… and the answer is, they will.

Ultimately, a group of twenty are so assembled, and that becomes the nuclei of the policies which emanate to the American Historical Association. Subsequently, around 1928, the Carnegie Endowment granted to the American Historical Association $400,000 in order to make a study of what the future of this country will probably turn out to be and should be. They came up with a seven-volume set of books, the last volume being a summary and digest of the other six. In the last volume, the answer is as follows:

“The future belongs to the United States….. the future in the United States belongs to collectivism administered with characteristic American efficiency”.

And here is that AHA — which was established in 1884, incorporated by Congress….

About Us

AHA Headquarters in Washington, D.C.

The American Historical Association (AHA) is a nonprofit membership organization founded in 1884 and incorporated by Congress in 1889 for the promotion of historical studies.

The AHA provides leadership for the profession, protects academic freedom, develops professional standards, aids in the pursuit and publication of scholarship, and supplies various services to sustain and enhance the work of its members.

The association’s principal functions fall within four realms:publication, teaching, advocacy, and networking. As the largest historical society in the United States, the AHA serves historians representing every historical period and geographical area.

The nearly 14,000 members include academics at universities, two- and four-year colleges, museums, historical organizations, libraries and archives, but also independent historians, students, K–12 teachers, government and business professionals, and countless people who, whatever their profession, possess an abiding interest in history.

Whether or not these guys started this association — it’s clear that they began to pay it off, early in the game.

THIS APPEARS (1884) TO BE AROUND THE TIME PUBLIC EDUCATION BECAME AVAILABLE — AND COMPULSORY, FOR THE MOST PART — IN THE U.S.  CONSIDER THE GOAL “TO CONTROL EDUCATION IN THE US”:  HERE’S AN OVERLY SIMPLISTIC (AND IDEALISTIC) VERSION — I JUST PUT PART OF IT HERE:

The Beginning of the Public Education System (this account seems something between a chronology and folklore…)

Until the 1840s the education system was highly localized and available only to wealthy people. Reformers who wanted all children to gain the benefits of education opposed this. Prominent among them were Horace Mann in Massachusetts and Henry Barnard in Connecticut. Mann started the publication of the Common School Journal, which took the educational issues to the public. The common-school reformers argued for the case on the belief that common schooling could create good citizens, unite society and prevent crime and poverty. {{SEE THIS MILENNIUM.  HA, HA, HA….}} As a result of their efforts, free public education at the elementary level was available for all American children by the end of the 19th century. Massachusetts passed the first compulsory school attendance laws in 1852, followed by New York in 1853. By 1918 all states had passed laws requiring children to attend at least elementary school. The Catholics were, however, opposed to common schooling and created their own private schools. Their decision was supported by the 1925 Supreme Court rule in Pierce v. Society of Sisters that states could not compel children to attend public schools, and that children could attend private schools instead.

. . .Eventually, every state developed a department of education and enacted laws regulating finance, the hiring of school personnel, student attendance, and curriculum

. . . By the middle of the 20th century, most states took a more active regulatory role than in the past. States consolidated school districts into larger units with common procedures. In 1940 there were over 117,000 school districts in the United States, but by 1990 the number had decreased to just over 15,000. The states also became much more responsible for financing education. In 1940 local property taxes financed 68 percent of public school expenses, while the states contributed 30 percent. In 1990 local districts and states each contributed 47 percent to public school revenues. The federal government provided most of the remaining funds.

increasing centralization and control.  Sound familiar?  Happening in the states also — and in the child support departments within states.  Increasing federal control until we can’t remember when things were NOT under federal control.  Except that most of us dont realize to what extent.

It is easier to control things you have got on your payroll.  Just threaten to withdraw it, after having got people hooked on the service, be it education or something else.    Well, Education is a real hot (and political) topic, one I’m familiar with (the war over), so  — – for now – – – – back to DODD transcript:

(Collectivism….)

And that becomes the policy which is finally picked up and manifests itself in the expression of collectivism all along the line, of which the dividing of this country into regions, using all of the logic which supports the ultimate idea that in order that regional government, in turn, be effective, there must be a new Constitution of the United States.

THE GOAL BEING — “WE NEED TO WRITE A NEW U.S. CONSTITUTION.”  (and guess who just might have one already drafted?)

That is the background, gentlemen, of this very serious question with which you all are now wrestling. I felt that, possibly, that might tend to help a little bit as you take on this high responsibility, which is tremendous. You must have been thoroughly impressed with the complexities which arrive and confront you if you do not go at this problem in terms of the origin of the idea and the real purpose behind that idea; and skipping all the way over to try to distill a system, or a working plan, whereby our society can cope with these complexities, such as they exist today. I am very appreciative of the opportunity to be with you. I wanted to make these points as brief as possible.

This man — who surely has a pretty interesting scope of the development of history, having read the minutes (or had staff who did) of the Carnegie Endowment, Ford Foundation, and personally spoken with their leaders — decalres that if we do NOT go at the problem in terms of the ORIGIN OF THE IDEA and THE REAL PURPOSE BEHIND THAT IDEA — it’s going to be seriously complex and difficult.

I have been saying the same thing about the family court aspects, since I learned the origins and purpose of the idea behind family court.  As someone destroyed by it, across the board — I was definitely motivated to find out whose (bad) idea it was.  Surprise, surprise — the answers ARE in writing, but no one seems to want to read them, and think about the consequences.  There is a CONSTANT CONFLICT between the ideas behind family court — which trend towards institutionalizing permanent, state-legislated, indoctrination sessions (‘called “education” including but not limited to “parental education”).  This concept is so utterly in conflict with the US Constitution (which most of us hope, think, wish, or somewhere within ourselves like to think, is still in operation somewhere — when for the most part it isn’t)  that there is going to be conflict and chaos THROUGHOUT society.

Think that’s coincidence?  Hence, when I looked UPwards at many of these organizations, I continually came up against centers and institutes within the universities, and associated “child development centers” so that the new theorists — who are typically not experienced parents, or even people who’ve been involved in the normal business of life, such as figuring out how to balance relationships, work, housing, and raising kids with personal values.  Rather, being in psychology or the social sciences, they have been groomed, right out of the gate, how to think about problems they encounter, how to frame them, and how to produce nice demonstration projects for their masters — which are the corporations, foundations, and government grants that fund their institutions (plus of course alumni contributions).

I did not go at education this way.  I actually had something I loved doing which adults ALSO do, and have since, probably forever (i’m in the arts) — and my livelihood is not dependent upon a constant stream of UNwilling subject matter to talk about behind their backs in jargon peculiar to my trade.  Social science is, however, a specific direction taken and pushed by these endowments and foundations — and its purpose is MANAGEMENT OF REGIONS OF POPULATION ACCORDING TO A MASTER PLAN.

This is no joke – it’s a plan!  and use of the word “intransigent” and language transformation is just part of it.  So are the federalized public schools, and characterizing people who want out of them as some kind of nutcases, perverts, or otherwise suspect individual.  Maybe they are eccentric (and as it turns out, many are also exceptional — as in exceptionally professionally successful) because its not the mainstream choice.

Alternate way of doing education means alternate way of working.  I can see why it would be threatening.   Here’s some John Taylor Gatto stuff (been a while since I read it), secondhand source:

Note: John Gatto is the former New York State Teacher of the Year who renounced the government school system in his landmark book DUMBING US DOWN. He is constantly in demand as a public speaker.

As a bit of background, the industrial titans of the 1890’s began to think that not only could the production line be engineered, but people’s lives could be engineered as well, in order to work like homogeneous robots with the machines. Rockefeller and Carnegie gave huge sums to prominent academics to see if this could be realized through the educational system. They found that to a considerable extent it could, and it is still being done today as evidenced in the Congressional Record during the Clinton administration. This is the story that John Gatto has to tell.-DB)

And here’s the link to the Congressional Record (anyone can double check through another source):

[QUOTE:}

On Sept. 25, 1998, Rep. Bob Schaffer placed in the Congressional Record an 18-page letter that has become famous as Marc Tucker’s “Dear Hillary” letter. It lays out the master plan of the Clinton Administration to take over the entire U.S. educational system so that it can serve national economic planning of the workforce.

The PDF of this letter as entered in the Congressional Record (starts in the lower right-hand corner of page): 1234567.

The “Dear Hillary” letter, written on Nov. 11, 1992 by Marc Tucker, president of the National Center on Education and the Economy (NCEE), lays out a plan “to remold the entire American system” into “a seamless web that literally extends from cradle to grave and is the same system for everyone,” coordinated by “a system of labor market boards at the local, state and federal levels” where curriculum and “job matching” will be handled by counselors “accessing the integrated computer-based program.”

Tucker’s plan would change the mission of the schools from teaching children academic basics and knowledge to training them to serve the global economy in jobs selected by workforce boards. Nothing in this comprehensive plan has anything to do with teaching schoolchildren how to read, write, or calculate.

Tucker’s ambitious plan was implemented in three laws passed by Congress and signed by President Clinton in 1994: the Goals 2000 Act, the School-to-Work Act, and the reauthorized Elementary and Secondary Education Act. These laws establish the following mechanisms to restructure the public schools:

1. Bypass all elected officials on school boards and in state legislatures by making federal funds flow to the Governor and his appointees on workforce development boards. ***
2. Use a computer database, a.k.a. “a labor market information system,” into which school personnel would scan all information about every schoolchild and his family, identified by the child’s social security number: academic, medical, mental, psychological, behavioral, and interrogations by counselors. The computerized data would be available to the school, the government, and future employers.
3. Use “national standards” and “national testing” to cement national control of tests, assessments, school honors and rewards, financial aid, and the Certificate of Initial Mastery (CIM), which is designed to replace the high school diploma.

Designed on the German system, the Tucker plan is to train children in specific jobs to serve the workforce and the global economy instead of to educate them so they can make their own life choices.

[/ENDQUOTE]

***I will testify — and if you want more proof, comment/contact me — that the HHS has figured out also how to bypass the legislature on Health and Human Services matters targeting the Governor’s Office.  People are hurting from this (See Kansas, Ohio, etc.) it happens so fast, people are simply shocked.  Another vehicle for fast-mobilized-centralization (with the goal of SATURATING a state with an ideology someone paid for) — is the office of faith-based and community initiatives.  (OFBCI) — which began as we know with GWBUSH.

A Bush in the office of President — or Bush appointee in the state-level HHS —  is worth an army in the hand.  Remember, the two ways to permanently alter life in the US included (a) WAR and (b) taking over education.

HHS right now is in largely the business of taking over education and management of people’s lives (womb to tomb) with the help of various gatekeepers. There are so many mechanisms to make an “end-run” around legislation (anything resembling taxation WITH representation), I doubt they can be caught up with or curtailed.  I believe individuals have to simply figure out where they fit in the mix — I can’t sit here year after year and simply sound the alarm.  I’m only one pair of lungs…

ALSO — FYI, it’s no coincidence that the attempt to sideline and silence women who have gotten past child-bearing age is no coincidence either.  Most of us CAN see through a lot of this, based on our experience raising children and dealing with their temperaments, plus our spouses (if any), plus jobs, plus institutions, etc.  It’s in our nature to be able to handle competing demands — yet somehow it seems to be in the nature of males to forbid us from doing so in ways that work for us as mothers.

So, when I sit here making fun of language use and language change — it’s for a reason.  So were the changes.

(Back to the post dealing with INTRANSIGENCE, and hope some of this was useful to others).

And the constant conferencing on how to expand and increase the “problem-solving courts” fails to address the truth that, over time, it’s the problem-solving courts posing as courts of justice (i.e., law, and what is supposed to go with it, truth, facts, etc.) that ARE the larger problem.

Obviously if “access” [context:  custody of children] can be “instransigent” — that’s giving an situation characteristics of something that contains a soul.  How can “access” be opinionated?    But this is exactly how the talespinners work, making up vocabulary as they go, until all around, entranced by their talk (combined with power) start to quote and believe made-up terms, like:

Parenting

Parent Education

Parental Alienation

Parenting Coordination

Seems to me if the word “parent” (root word is from the word “obey,”) has become a separate verb, than it’s on its way out of existence, which it basically is.

Anyhow, AFCC apparently has been working the word “intransigent” into its literature and talk longer than I realized, playing it like a new, shiny gold coin they’ve just discovered, which might actually bring on some of the gold.  Well, paper currency, or transfer of assets, etc. . . . .  if it’s tossed around properly.

Here’s a retrospective of uses, from simply a google search:  Did you know all these things could be so obdurate, bull-headed and opinionated? (and let’s not forget, if it’s a parent, also it can be flawed, or high-conflict, etc.)

Advanced Issues in Child Custody: Evaluation, Litigation and – AFCC

• [PDF] 

  Building Multidisciplinary Professional Partnerships with the … – AFCC

  www.afccnet.org/pdfs/UALR99_revised.pdf

  File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat – Quick View
  by JR Johnston – Cited by 58 – Related articles
  vulnerable persons get from others during the process.16 In particular, family …… The more intransigent conflict-ridden families are likely to be more troubled by …
  

• [PDF] 

  AFCC Newsletter Sp2004 Pages

  www.afccnet.org/Portals/0/…/AFCC_Newsletter_sp2004_web.pdf

  File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat – Quick View
  Anniversary. AFCC’s Sixth Congress on Parent Education and AccessPro- ….. ner or spouse of one of the participants who is intransigent in work- ing with any …
  

• [PDF] 

  NEWSLETTER – AFCC

  www.afccnet.org/…/1989%20Summer%20AFCC%20Newsletter.pdf

  File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat – Quick View
  access to a non-custodial parent who is not paying child … AFCC’s1990 annual meeting will be held in Winnipeg ….. lawyer ethics,intransigent cases, pre-mar- …
  

• [PDF] 

  AzAFCC 100 Years and Counting.indd

  http://www.azafcc.org/pdfs/2012_brochure.pdf

  File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat – View as HTML
  continuing education for psychologists. AFCC maintains responsibility for this program and its content. …. B2: Parent Access and the Reluctant Child. B3: Parenting … high conflict divorces is helping resolveintransigent access issues when a …
  

• Annual AFCC General Conference – October 21, 2011 « The Smart …

  blog.thesmartdivorce.com/…/annual-afcc-general-conference-october…

  Jun 17, 2011 – Entry filed under: AFCC information, For Divorce Professionals. Tags: . How you can forgive your ex-spouse Estranged or Abandoned by a …
  

• 2007 AFCC and NCJFCJ Regional Training Conference

  http://www.docstoc.com/…/2007-AFCC-and-NCJFCJ-Regional-Training- …

  Mar 13, 2011 – Saturday Working with Domestic Violence AccessingPrograms for High ….. Part one will focus on how intransigent couples both researchers …
  

• [PDF] 

  Texas AFCC Quarterly Newsletter

  http://www.texasafcc.org/pdfs/newslwtter_3rd_2005.pdf

  File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat – Quick View
  working on AFCC projects and getting to know … Once you get over the slightly odd mental image of a group …. intransigent pathology to a Coordinator with a …
  

• [PDF] 

  AFCC Columbus 2007-3

  http://www.flafcc.org/Documents/AFCC-Columbus-2007.pdf

  File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat – Quick View
  2007 – Cited by 1 – Related articles
  Three days of parenting coordination programs based on the AFCCParenting Coordination Guidelines …. NCJFCJ seeks access to fair, effective, and timely justice for every child and every … Part one will focus on how intransigent  couples …
  

[PDF] 

CUSTODY DISPUTES INVOLVING ALLEGATIONS OF DOMESTIC …

The art of word-dropping, like spreading seed, sows ideas . . . . .  gives an aura of respectability and authority.  this wouldn’t matter were not judges involved, and custody evaluators and attorneys who then go back, write it up, talk it up, and take your life away.. . . . .

(Instransigence is only bad when applied to the wrong thing.  And that’s a value call.  For example, every US President has to swear an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution.   They are supposed to be “instransigent” in that regard — but as we are finding out, rarely are.)

I love the acknowledgement that Religions Beliefs are Intransigent and so Immune from Resolution; don’t we have a Republican Candidate for US President who is utterly intransigent on to what extent ALL female reproductive process should come under the control of his particular religious views — or if not, that’s incringing on this freedom to practice said religion, which includes scapegoating women, forbidding them from holding priesthoods, controlling access to contraception, coverup of child sexual abuse by priests as routine, causing generational difficulties, and insistence on retaining tax-exempt status even when actual allegiance is to a foreign power (the Vatican), specifically?  I’m not talking about the rank and file membership, I’m talking about the LEADERSHIP of this.

Part and parcel of this religious belief is that women do not REALLY have the right to stand up to serious abuse — they should try harder to preserve the marriage, while calling people “Father” who are not their fathers, submitting to them for the most part, and teaching their children to, although even Jesus said (per Bible), “call no man Father.”

My favorite one from the list above is the 2005 AFCC (Texas) usage, in which it’s parental pathology that’s really intransigent:

Parenting Coordination in Texas also isn’t several things. Unlike Kansas, Coordinators do not become case managers, able to make recommendations and create their own temporary orders for changes in custody.  [[what a shame, eh?]] 8 Judges are required to maintain oversight of the PC process and retain “management and control” of the litigation process. PC is also not a “magic bullet” for high conflict cases. Just as a court can not force litigants to co-parent appropriately, Parenting Coordinators cannot force parents to change if they do not want to reduce their conflict.

[[What this fails to recognize is that there are two parents, and one of them doesn’t really have the ability to force the other — without more court proceedings, contempts and judges who give a crap about violations of court order, or law for that matter — to obey them.  This is a SERIOUS issue — this talk displaces authority.  It’s not my responsibility to persuade my ex to fly straight (or vice versa), just as it’s not my responsibility to stop crime, although I can try and deter some of it personally.  SO long as anyone can hold me PERSONALLy responsible for regulating the behavior of someone I separated from, don’t live with, and don’t control, I am never free, the courts and law enforcement have just dumped THEIR responsibilities on me as a citizen, yet they are paid for this, and I am not.   It’s “insane” logic — but that’s what the language communicates.  Two adults separated are not two children engaged in a squabble.  EVERYONE has issues (something the professionals rarely admit), but in the court, if the issue is not about a clear understanding of RIGHTS and RESPONSIBILITIES based in law — not AFCC made-up psychobabble as practiced in family courts throughout the land — then it’s a NON-issue, or should be.]]

[[What if the parents have an intransigent conflict with their civil rights and legal rights being consistently violated, and time wasted, by the endless evaluations and court proceedings trying to get them to “submit or else”???]]

[[Do you hear the exasperated parent tone in there?  I sure do.   PROBLEM:  It takes two to tango — but this discussion, as ever, is in plural:  “parents.”  No mention is made of whether or not one parent might actually be RIGHT for resisting (this or that)>]]

Courts can implement sanctions for inappropriate behavior, and much like an intervention with an alcoholic they can “raise the bottom” for hostile parents – the court has the ability to make it more painful for the litigants to maintain their current behavior rather than investing the time and energy needed to make true and lasting changes.

Certainly each case referred to PC is going to need an individual approach. I would hope judges hesitate to send a case with parents evidencing Personality Disorders or other intransigent pathology to a Coordinator with a transformative approach. ***At the same time, I also hope that judges refrain from going overboard seeking enforcement/accountability when parents simply have unaddressed grief over the breakup impairing their co- parenting ability. There must be clarity from the court regarding the role of the Coordinator and the goals in sending the parents for PC services. There also must be clarity from the Coordinaror about their philosophy and the interventions they are willing to implement. Once there is clarity regarding which parts of the elephant we are dealing with we can improve our common language and better “see” what Parenting Coordination can be.

(I notice this site is also quoting Boyan & Termini — if the shoe fits wear it).

**It’s the incessant intention to transform other people (and the courts) which is so entirely annoying, and inappropriate.  Besides, what’s an “intransigent pathology” and how many of the practitioners know squat about it?   Even cancer has remission — and this is simply certain people, usually psychologists, wishing to sound more grown-up than their talk merits by using 12-letter words, which it is:

“I N T R A N S I G E N T”

(“joshanddeborah.blogspot.com,” image to the right)

So one INTRANSIGENT part of AFCC is the concept that anyone who disagrees with the belief that it’s proper to continue to have to negotiate and bargain with a criminal — just because this person also sired (or gave birth to) one’s offspring — should be forced to undergo this AND also submit to expert advice on how to, plus psychological profiles, paid supervised visits (and etc.).   Now THAT’s Intransigent.

Just a little exercise — here’s a paragraph analyzing a couple that the writer probably doesn’t know very well.  Note the phrasing, and then guess who are the couple:

DYNAMICS OF CONFLICT

Unfortunately, this relationship suffers from many implicitly intransigent challenges and as a result this relationship will suffer many ups and downs. There is much evidence that points to a relationship of natural enmity. For what a number of witnesses have reported and the circumstances leading to their first breakup as a couple, there are a number of red flags that both _ _ _ _  and  _ _ _ _ should heed very carefully, since the vast majority of relationships in history have failed due to Imin enmity.

(say, What???)

Look — the world is full of armchair relationship experts.  But it takes a certain pathology to actually expect the local county, state, and federal funds to pay for one’s expertise, to be used on a captive audience.  Reminds me of the Nazi’s. ….  It’s not the quality of the expertise that’s the main point (though I question its neutrality — or even the need for it)  — it’s the POSITIONING that scares me — because I’m a parent, and actually care about my kid’s (not that they are still kids!) futures.  I’m concerned that they even remember what personal privacy, and choice, IS, and hope they can seek some from time to time, in fact, the harder decisions there are in life, the more important a place of centered peace (ability to listen to one’s gut instincts) becomes.

Happy Valentine’s Day.

Sorry but this was also on the news, and it seems reported a little evasively, with an emphasis on collateral damage and that it was a shootout, which apparently it was.  On the other hand, if someone near the initial target had not been armed, it might have been instead another massacre.  And this time, no one died, although it was a horrible incident:

Vallejo is north of San Francisco, and has a bit of a reputation for crime, though nothing like two other cities in the same general area, Richmond and Oakland.  So here, is the morning news:

• Shootout At Vallejo Nail Salon Sends 5 To Hospital

  VALLEJO (CBS SF) — Five people, including a child, were hurt in a shooting at a nail salon in Vallejo on Monday night, police said.

  The shooting occurred around 7:15 p.m…

  Police said a gunman walked into the door and shot a woman, and then shot at the mother of the salon’s owner, hitting her in both arms.

  The owner’s two-year-old daughter was also shot twice in the abdomen and once in the leg and was listed in critical condition, according to authorities.

• Nail salon riddled with bullets; 2-year-old, four others wounded

Two people, toddler, injured at Vallejo Nail salon

The couple did not have any children together, according to police. There were also no reports of domestic violence involving the couple, Lynch said.

“There was nothing to indicate that something like this was about to occur,” he said.

Run this by again — why is it sad for a selfish, entitled, murderer just because he offed himself, too? (not willing to stick around and to time for the crime….)..

Wanna place any bets on ethnicity?

No, what a sick society we have, in which it’s now acceptable commonplace for men to just “off” women who reject them.  …   Where is Ellen Pence’s & Domestic Abuse Intervention Program’s “CCR”collective community response” theory now?

Neighbors heard gunshots, they called the police, looks like this woman wasn’t armed, or possibly mis-read the situation and the man, or felt she could reason her way out of something.   We don’t know . . .. whose house?  (articles say, he was from Oakland).

9OYS sat down with attorney Mike Piccarreta to ask him, how effective are protection orders?

“Well it’s a piece of paper and if somebody doesn’t want to follow the law and is bent on harming you a piece of paper isn’t going to stop them,” he said.  The details in the restraining order will also determine how much police can do.

Michael L. Piccarreta

Michael L. Piccarreta received his undergraduate and law degrees from the University of Toledo (1971, 1974).

Mr. Piccarreta’s practice is limited to the criminal defense of corporations and individuals. Mr. Piccarreta has extensive experience in representing corporations and corporate officers for alleged improprieties such as securities violations, fraud, environmental matters and other complicated white collar crimes. Mr. Piccarreta has extensive experience in representing those accused of murder, fraud, narcotics and marijuana violations, money laundering, vehicular homicide and other serious matters. . . .

Mr. Piccarreta has been involved in many highly publicized cases and as a result has appeared on 60 Minutes, The Today Show, Good Morning America, The Daily Rundown, CBS News, NBC News, CNN, CNBC, MSNBC, National Public Radio, Inside Edition and has been quoted in most major American newspapers.

Mr. Piccarreta served as president of the State Bar of Arizona. He is a past president and a founding member of the Arizona Attorneys for Criminal Justice. He served on and chaired various committees for the State Bar of Arizona including the Criminal Rules Committee and Criminal Justice Section.

Mr. Piccarreta has been well recognized by his peers. He was selected by peer review to be listed in The Best Lawyers in America for the past 20 years and was selected as one of the leading individuals for white collar crime litigation in the state of Arizona by Chambers USA. He was selected as one of the Southwest Super Lawyers and named as one of Tucson’s leading lawyers by Tucson Lifestyle Magazine.

Case Number: File Date: Caption: Judge:

Party Information Party Full Name Party Role Name Type CLAUDIA GABRIELA PASCUAL Plaintiff True JAMES B LEONARD Defendant True

Case/Document Information Document Type Document SubType Document Caption File Date Image Affidavit Affidavit Of Service AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE – JAMES B LEONARD 11/22/2011 Available at Courthouse Receipt All Money Receipts All Money Receipts #1630010 11/21/2011 Available at Courthouse Order Order Of Protection/Restraining Order Order Of Protection/Restraining Order 11/18/2011 Available at Courthouse Open Petition For Order Of Protection Petition For Order Of Protection 11/18/2011 Available at Courthouse ME Petitions HEARING ON EX PARTE PETITION FOR ORDER OF PROTECTION 11/18/2011 Available

Case Number: File Date: Caption: Judge:

Party Information Party Full Name Party Role Name Type JAMES BENJAMIN LEONARD III Plaintiff True GERALDINO ORTIZ Defendant True CLAUDIA PASCUAL Other True

Case/Document Information Document Type Document SubType Document Caption File Date Image Mail Return Mail RETURN MAIL – UNABLE TO FORWARD – JAMES LEONARD 9/20/2010 Available at Courthouse Affidavit Affidavit Of Service DECLARATION OF SERVICE 9/20/2010 Available at Courthouse Order Hearing Order HEARING ORDER 9/15/2010 Available at Courthouse Misc Request For Hearing/Continuance REQUEST HEARING 9/15/2010 Available at Courthouse Order Transfer Order & Notice Of Hearing TRANSFER ORDER 9/15/2010 Available at Courthouse Acceptance Acceptance Of Service ACCEPTANCE OF SERVICE 9/13/2010 Available at Courthouse Receipt All Money Receipts All Money Receipts #1430318 9/10/2010 Available at Courthouse Order Order Of Protection/Restraining Order Order Of Protection/Restraining Order 9/9/2010 Available at Courthouse Open Petition For Order Of Protection Petition For Order Of Protection 9/9/2010 Available at Courthouse ME Petitions PETITION FOR ORDER OF PROTECTION 9/9/2010 Available

and etc.  For DV,Pima County Resources for Domestic ViolencePima County Superior Court, 110 W. Congress, Tucson, AZ 85701

General Information (520) 740-4200 TDD: (520) 740-8887

Clerk of the Court (520) 740-3200

Conciliation Court (520) 740-5590

Let’s take a look at “Conciliation Court” (that’s if a couple has children in common right?  Or if were married, co-habiting, and here comes domestic violence.  Divorce is worse for society than dangerous domestic violence, hence we have Conciliation Causes throughout the land):

The Family Center of the Conciliation Court Provides Family Law Court Services Free of Charge to Residents of Pima County.  Mediation  Conciliation Counseling  Custody/Access Evaluation  Parent Education Program  Community Education  Educational Material  Forms  Family Law  Frequently Asked Questions Grace Hawkins, LCSW Director Conciliation Court 32 N. Stone Ave. Suite 1704 Tucson, Arizona 85701-1403 Office Hours: 8:00am – Noon 1:00pm – 5:00pm Monday – Friday (except Holidays) Phone: (520) 740-5590 FAX: (520) 624-4034 E-mail: fccc@sc.pima.gov

Please note that “Conciliation Court” and “Family Law” are two different links.  Under Parent Education:

In an action for divorce, annulment, legal separation, paternity and in some post decree actions involving a minor child common to both parties, parents are required to attend a parent education course. Unless otherwise ordered by the Judge, parties must attend the class within 45 days of filing or being served by a petition. You must register for and complete the course whether or not you are responding to a petition. Failure to attend the course will not delay your divorce, but may result in the court denying you any future requests for relief such as modifications in custody, parenting time and/or child support.** The course is mandated by the Arizona Legislature (ARS § 25-351) to help educate parents about the impact separation, divorce, family reorganization, conflict and family litigation can have on children and parents. The class will provide you with information that can help minimize the stress and harmful effects upon you and your children in what can be a very difficult time in your lives.  Register Online Q. Class Fee

B2: Parent Access and the Reluctant Child Moderator: Philip M. Stahl, Ph.D., ABPP (Forensic)

Speakers: Honorable Elaine Fridlund-Hore, Joel Glassman, Ph.D.

Among the most difficult challenges when working with high conflict divorces is helping resolve intransigent ** access issues when a child refuses to see a parent. These children and their parents are frequently sent to a Reunification Therapist to try and help re-build the relationship in a healthy way. However, this process can be expensive and is often unproductive, even after months or even years. This interactive workshop will explore alternatives for these families, ranging from judicial orders (including a change of custody), psycho- educational interventions, summer camp, and helping parents learn to “withdraw for now” in a psychologically healthy way.

Related to INTRANSIGENT

Synonyms: adamant, adamantine, bullheaded, dogged,hard, hardened, hardheaded, hard-nosed, headstrong,immovable, implacable, inconvincible, inflexible, obstinate,mulish, obdurate, opinionated, ossified, pat, pertinacious,perverse, pigheaded, self-opinionated, self-willed, stiff-necked, stubborn, unbending, uncompromising,unrelenting, unyielding, willful (or wilful)

This interactive workshop will explore alternatives for these families, ranging from judicial orders (including a change of custody), psycho- educational interventions, summer camp, and helping parents learn to “withdraw for now” in a psychologically healthy way

Several of our compatriots have solid products for this situation we have created, and perhaps you would like to buy into this franchise, or develop a slight variation, for your local use.  For example, there’s Dick Warshak’s Family Bridges reunification class, or Matt Sullivan, Robin Deutsch’s & Pegge Ward’s “overcoming barriers” summer camp, and then possibly one of our judges might order the recalcitrant parent to undergo some more psychiatric evaluation (intervention/indoctrination) until they start to see it our way, and forget about their own perceptions or parental protection instincts.  For beginners, you can take this advanced parenting coordination training and read our sample report on how to trash (attribute all negative characteristics to) the Mother.  We have to be a little careful, because that “Rachel Foundation,” did — after all — precipitate a lawsuit:

Factual Background

10. The Carr family was ordered to undergo therapy with Dr. Barry Bricklin and Dr. Gail Elliot. In October of 2004, at the behest of Dr. Bricklin and Dr. Elliot, the Court ordered Mr. Carr and the Children to participate in a family “reunification” program at the Rachel Foundation in Harper, Gillespie County, Texas.

11. To the best of the undersigned’s knowledge, the Rachel Foundation is not a licensed medical facility or child care facility and the Rachel Foundation does not appear to fall under the regulatory umbrella of any Texas agency.

12. Pamela Stuart-Mills Hoch and Robert Hoch are the directors and employees of the Rachel Foundation. To the best of the undersigned’s knowledge, neither Pamela Stuart-Mills Hoch nor Robert Hoch is a licensed health care provider in the State of Texas.

13. The Children resided at the Rachel Foundation from approximately November 17, 2004 through December 17, 2004. During this month-long stay, the Rachel Foundation enlisted the services of Dr. Jack Ferrell to propagate the Children’s “reunification” with Mr. Carr.

14. Dr. Jack Ferrell is a licensed psychologist in the State of Texas. Between August 19, 2003 and April 21, 2004, Dr. Jack Ferrell was cited for two criminal DWIs and was involved in a third alcohol related incident (See Exhibits A-C). Currently, Dr. Jack Ferrell’s methodologies and ethical practices, and the status of his license, are under review and investigation by the State Board of Examiners of Psychologists.

15. During their stay at the Rachel Foundation, the Children were mentally and emotionally abused by Pamela Stuart-Mills Hoch, Robert Hoch and Dr. Jack Ferrell.

16 The Children were also threatened on more than one occasion. (See Exhibits D-F). Specifically, the Children were told that they would not be able to leave Texas nor would they be able to see their mother unless they cooperated with the Rachel Foundation’s “reunification” program.

17. While at the Rachel Foundation, one of the Children was attacked and bitten by Pamela Stuart-Mills Hoch’s and Robert Hoch’s dog. It appears that the dog has subsequently died or been destroyed.

18. The Rachel Foundation, Pamela Stuart-Mills Hoch, Robert Hoch and Dr. Jack Ferrell applied numerous circumspect methodologies in their evaluation and “treatment” of the Children and have used their influence to purposefully harm Plaintiff, acting outside the scope of any implicit or explicit permission granted Defendants by Plaintiff or any court or other agency.

19. As a result of Defendants’ misconduct, Plaintiff has suffered considerable emotional distress

Arizona Association of Family and Conciliation Courts 2006 Annual Conference

February 3-5, 2006 Hilton Sedona Resort and Spa

Pre-Conference Institute – Friday, February 3

“Child Abuse, What You Need To Know” – Leslie Drozd, Ph.D.

Plenary Speakers: “Long-Term Consequences of Divorce for Children” – Paul R. Amato, Ph.D.

“Domestic Violence and Parenting Evaluations” – William Austin, Ph.D.

“Stalking Behavior” – Mindy Mechanic, Ph.D. & Maureen O’Connor, Ph.D.

Claudia G. declared she was stalked.  But somehow not enough domestic violence to seriously restrain the ex, who we now know was already being pressured (most likely) from a prior relationship.  It’s a shame women take up with such men, too….  But they are looking for someone else, often someone else with children may be in need of some help (either babysitting or rent, or a man around).  From what I can tell, there has to be a better way.

Here’s yet ANOTHER, 2012, Valentines-Day Timed murder.  This Time the Dad got his wife’s 19 year old niece too.  Now an 8 and 12-year old (relatives?) also got to hear the gunshots at home.  You’d THINk sometime, sooner or later, the AFCC collective might figure this out — but they just do not seem to care.  All divorces need to have co-parenting and parental access, bar none.  Unless of course, one parent has been recalitrant or there is an intransigent situation, in which case that parent can be punished somehow (like, by allowing their children to be controlled by an abuser, sitting through indoctrination classes, or simply being cut off from the kids, period).      THIS ONE was from Texas:

Husband arrested in fatal shooting of wife and niece

By Dale Lezon and Cindy George Updated 12:46 p.m., Tuesday, February 14, 2012

A 30-year-old man has been arrested in the shooting deaths of his estranged wife and her niece at a home in northwest Harris County early Monday morning.

Ricardo Jose Prado Jr, 30, is charged with capital murder in the deaths of Rachel Prado, 29, and 19-year-old Jasmine Nicole Rhodes at their home in the 7800 block of Mosewood near Vernwood about 1:20 a.m. Monday, according to the Harris County Sheriff’s Office.

. . .Investigators said they believe Prado ambushed the two women when they backed their car into the garage when they returned to the home from a dinner. He shot them both inside the garage and then left after the shooting. Deputies said Prado has history of domestic violence against his wife.

This might have explained her “estrangement” — but what explains him still being on the loose?  (rhetorical question)

Rachel Prado’s mother and two small children, ages 8 and 12, who also live in the house were at home at the time of the shooting. They were not harmed. The woman told investigators she was asleep when gunshots woke her. She looked out the window and saw Prado running from the scene. Then she found the two women shot to death in the garage.

. . .[9 gunshots were heard]   Clifford Schoffield, who is Rachel Prado’s uncle, said the family is in shock. He said Rachel Prado had been trying to get out of the marriage because it was no longer working.

“It’s a love triangle – ‘If I can’t have her, nobody will’ – that’s basically what it is,” Schoffield said.

He may not have hated his niece. She maybe just happened to be a witness..

It appears those were the children, too:

Rachael Prado’s family told News 92 FM that her husband was upset because she wanted to divorce him and end their marriage after 11 years together. The couple has two children.

Interesting — the woman thought that they’d be safer if they were together.  Instead, a 29 year old and a 19 year old were BOTH shot to death (and in the back, the coward!) The alleged shooter being a “respectable man” in his 30s:

Both Prado and Rhodes arrived home together “for safety reasons,” Schoffield said, adding that the older woman was trying to get out of a marriage that wasn’t working.

“He wasn’t a bad person, up until now,” the uncle said. “They had their ups and downs and he was probably doing some things I wasn’t aware of, but he was part of the family.”

Schoffield said the alleged shooter is in his 30s, has been “very respectable and very mannerable” and was in between jobs.

Funny how the public (or at least our representatives & congressmen, and clergy, and many others) will believe almost anything they are sold about poor people and the cause of poverty and abuse, and about the fatherlessness crisis — but they simply will not believe that this thing has gone well overboard, and that some men should not be fathers — if they can’t cool it on the wife-assaults.   In this case — what family court would’ve cut off visitation from such a father (and I’ll bet, did not in this case, either).  She has to live somehow — she moved in with her mother, and the grandchildren — and paid with her life for not taking greater precautions.  Should I look up that case history too, or had no one filed yet?

Harris County Record:

Print Summary Case (Cause) Summary File Date 2/6/2002 Case (Cause) Status Complete Offense ASSAULT-FAMILY MEMBER Last Instrument Filed Misdemeanor Information Case Disposition DISP-021302 Case Completion Date 2/13/2002 Defendant Status DISPOSED Bond Amount $1,500.00 Next/Last Setting Date 2/13/2002 Defendant Details Race/Sex WHITE / MALE Eyes BROWN Skin LIGHT BROWN DOB 4/26/1981 Height/Weight 5’10 / 240 LBS Hair BLACK Build HEAVY In Custody Y (Locate) Address 8206 TIGER LANE HOUSTON TX77040 Markings TAT L ARM Court Details Current Court 12th Address 1201 Franklin (Floor: 10) Houston, TX 77002 Phone:7137557738 JudgeName Robin Brown Court Type Criminal

NOTE:  I am not sure this is the exact same person.   It seems to match, period.  The “in custody” would make sense in light of recent events.

LOOK:

There’s NO WAY that every time there’s a major, family-oriented holiday (which most major holidays, or minor ones, tend to be sold as) — that all responding police to 911 calls could get there in time.    There’s no way all piece-of-paper protective orders actually protect (not they say “protectIVE”).  So the only way I can see is either:

• Continue to allow women, and associates, and sometimes the kids, to be shot to death, and places of businesses serving women also get shot up, in which case a lot of money can be saved by not doing any more domestic violence decades-long studies and comparisons.  PERHAPS some of that money could then be used to allow women and children to completely relocate (assuming no one’s going to jail, which is likely).
• That of course doesn’t handle any remaining-behind-relatives which might be at risk as hostages if a person is REAL determined.
• OR . . . .. . 
• There could be mandatory — not MEDIATION — but self-defense AND weapons-training for victims of domestic violence.  They will then, from this point forward, start protecting themselves (in many more cases) which would send a collective message that it ain’t going to be so easy for the NEXT guy — and it might just be you, not me-then-you in any exchange of gunfire.  in other words, deterrence. 
• 
  

However, to be completely consistent on this one, the family court system would have to be utterly dismantled, because it sure as hell isn’t going to voluntarily dissolve its “problem-solving courts.”    Then again, this WOULD save the country a bundle — think about it — not only all the obvious (salaries, several court-houses and family law facilitators, etc. etc.) — but also the slush funds, and all that money disappearing down the black hole of ero accountability (or something close to it) in the child support system, too.

Of course several religions will have nothing to do with this — therefore a related solution would be to remove their tax-exempt status on the grounds that it’s been used as an accomplice to some of these disasters, and besides, worshipping anything (including one’s status as the head of a household, or “family” or “fertility, etc.”) is per se “idolatry” which is the FIRST commandment, but which the apostle Paul compared the 10th with i.e., “covetousness, which is idolatry.”  (covetousness meaning greed).

Unless you’re Catholic, and the 2nd Commandment has been eliminated (no graven images, nor bow down to and serve them), and the 10th, “Thou shalt not covet” decimated and explicated — kind of like domestic violence — to limit only TWO things one shouldn’t covet.      I forget which two they are, because it seems to me the original is better.

There are all kinds of potentialities to human relationships if certain groups would get that the basic unit of our COUNTRY (in the US, and legally speaking) should be the individually — and not the family.  Society can have its variety then — families, and non-families not that I’m anti-family.  I just think it’s been over-rated, and regret that I set such a high value on it myself, parallel to my own work life, which was doing just fine about the time I married.  SO much for THAT concept …..

BUT BACK TO THE 2006 AFCC CONFERENCE EXPERTS ON “STALKING” (notice, above, it’s in quotes, as though “alleged” and not real).

Dr. Mindy shows up as a domestic violence resource, and in fact in 2011 (report date) even published with others a nice study about the dangers of Intimate Partner Abuse, mandatory mediation, or (whatever . . . . . . ).  Of note — it was DOJ grant-funded, and the family court system was heavily involved in it.  As AFCC & the Family Court System are pretty similar in practice and purpose, the study is pretty much of a moot point.  Nevertheless, here it is:

The author(s) shown below used Federal funds provided by the U.S. Department of Justice and prepared the following final report:

Document Title:  

Intimate Partner Abuse in Divorce Mediation: Outcomes from a Long-Term Multi-cultural Study

Author:  

Connie J. A. Beck, Ph.D., Michele E. Walsh, Ph.D., Mindy B. Mechanic, Ph.D., Aurelio Jose Figueredo, Ph.D., Mei-Kuang Chen, M.A., M.S.

Document No.:     Date Received:    Award Number:

236868      December 2011     2007-WG-BX-0028

SO very many people worked hard to make this possible. [*]…

([*] Notice “Leora Rosen,” at bottom of next text — well-known in the domestic violence field.  I also know (Thank you, Leora) that she and some of her compatriots fought pretty hard to discourage mandatory mediation in cases involving violence.  They lost, obviously.   I heard (elsewhere, years earlier) that this was fought tooth and nail, and as history shows, for the most part defeated — or possibly out-spent.  The world is not ready to accept independent single mothers or accept how common wife-battering is, or simply killing after separation, when it’s possible to get even MORE grants from the theme that what the world needs now is less divorce and more Dads involved in raising their kids.  Or else.

Anyhow, just scan the acknowledgements, and thank GOD — No, the friends and sons of Claudia G. Pascual thank you — for all this hard work in actually studying The Effect of Gamma Rays on Man-in-the-moon Marigolds   The Effect of Requiring Divorce Mediation With a  Seriously Dangerous Domestic Violence Perpetrator Intimate Partner Abuse {{by flawed parents within a High-Conflict Family undergoing reorganization}}.  

Her life / death / murder, and those of the other women around THIS Valentine’s Day across the country, bear testament to the “wisdom” of trying to blend domestic violence awareness with family theory run by The Reunification Party. . . . 

The study was a massive undertaking spanning nearly a decade. There are many people who were indispensible in making the study possible. We would first like to thank Pima County Superior Court Judges Karen Adam and Jan Kearney for recognizing the importance of this study for family law in Pima County, Arizona, providing access to the databases and for their support and guidance throughout the project. Without their support the project could never have been completed.

“No problem,” I can imagine the reply.  However, now this samey family law court gets to say, it cooperated with people concerned about violence against women, and yes, we understand domestic violence (although I’d say it seems they don’t…..)

We would next like to thank the current (Grace Hawkins) and former (Fred Mitchell) directors of the Pima County Family Center of the Conciliation Court. Grace Hawkins was instrumental in assisting the study by providing research office space, record storage space, access to computers and court databases and for allowing the research team to spend years collecting data at their offices. Fred Mitchell continued the work of former director Linda Kerr in identifying the need for adequate screening for intimate partner abuse at the study site. Dr. Mitchell instituted a policy requiring use of a written questionnaire screening measure, which became an integral part of the data. Paul LaFrance, former office manager, identified variables within the mediation case files and consulted on many aspects of the initial design of the study. Without this long-term support the project would not have been possible. Thank you to the many mediators and office staff at the Conciliation Court for answering our questions and providing assistance to us as we collected the data. It is a rare public agency that welcomes this type of in-depth research and analysis of their work.

We would also like to thank Sergeant William Briamonte of the Tucson Police Department and Mr. Frank Gonzalez of the Pima County Sheriff’s office for working closely with the research team and designing methods for data collection from area law enforcement databases. Our colleague and friend Dr. Edward Anderson of the University of Texas at Austin provided vital statistical consulting and conducted the latent class analyses in this study.

There are few studies which can be conducted without the extensive support of students. We thank the many undergraduate students (Jessica Jorgensen Willis, Fairlee Fabrett, Merredith Levenson, Stacey Brady, Whitney Kearney, Melissa Rubin, Ryan Davidson; Karey O’Hara Brewster), Devon Harris and graduate students (Caitilin Taylor, Marieh Tanha and Melissa Tehee) who contributed to collecting data, abstracting information from court records, coding and entering data and conducting reliability checks. In particular, a heartfelt thanks to Karey O’Hara Brewster and Ryan Davidson. Karey served mid-study as lead research keeping the project organized and training other students in data collection. Ryan served as the lead research assistant and liaison to the law enforcement agencies and kept the project going in its final stages.

Thanks are also due to the National Institute of Justice (NIJ) for the financial support of this project. Funding for mediation research is so difficult to secure yet so important for the lives of divorcing parents and children, particularly those with intimate partner violence. We thank the NIJ staff members who have worked with us over the years. Leora Rosen was instrumental in stewarding us through the grant application and review process

Here’s another one that came up when I searched “Leora Rosen mandatory mediation” which shows that someone knows, it’s dangerous:

Mandatory Custody Mediation: Empirical Evidence of Increased Risk for Domestic Violence Victims and Their Children 

 by  Dennis P. Saccuzzo ; Nancy E. Johnson ; Wendy J. Koen

DATE RECEIVED April 2003, GRANT AWARD # 1999-WT-VX-0015

And this is what it said:  Note, date received is eight years EARLIER than the 2011 above — but practice still continues unabated…(some words may not copy too well– see original).  This is from the intro:

Nearly all states utilize mediation for child custody disputes.’ Individual states vary widely, however, from optional mediation at the parties’ expense2to mandatory mediation with no exclusion for domestic ~iolence.~

It is in cases of domestic violence where the use of mediation has drawn the most c r i t i c i sm.  Although proponents argue that it is possible to mediate child custody disputes even where there is domestic violence, critics have noted the potential harm to both the battered woman and the child viclims of domestic vioIence.* Nevertheless e,ven the most optimistic proponents agree that in order for such mediation to be successful, the mediator must acknowledge the violence and balance the power. **

**the voice of experience here — this is how the compromise principle can manipulate a case completely of protection.  As I was not privvy to the discussions between experts determining that, well, if they couldn’t keep such violent situations OUT of forced mediation, at least they’d try to train the mediator — or hope the mediator — would “acknowledge the violence and balance the power.”  Which is a crock, given who is paying for court-appointed mediation (fatherhood federal funds, since 1996, for the most part; local counties) and what the purpose of mediation under stuch funding IS (increased NONcustodial parenting time.  By definition, if a DV order creates a noncustodial parent (and child support order to go with it, esp.), then to increase the NONcustodial parenting time is to increase the time a batterer has with his children, and they have without the victim to protect, buffer, or defer his abuse.  And, it also increases the victim’s time with the batterer, too through more frequent exchanges, etc., etc.  Altogether, not a wise idea IF child’s best interests is a serious interest.

6 Because mediation is a confidential process, the empirical literature has had relatively little to say about whether mediators acknowledge the violence, much less balance the power.

Empirical evaluations of the effects of mandatory custody mediation in domestic violence as well as non-domestic violence cases are exceedingly rare. Thus far, evaluations of mandatory custody mediation have focused almost exclusively on retrospective self-reported satisfaction, with little regard for evaluations of equitable outcome^.^ The primary goal of the California courts in custody decisions, for example, is not parental satisfaction, but rather the health, safety and welfare of the children. Self-reported satisfaction may have little relationship to the critical outcome:of safety for the victim and child. There is empirical evidence that when mandated to mediation, even the most extremely violent couples agree to terms of joint custody with the mother as possessory parent,but standard visitation-an arrangement that is ill-advised for the mother and child(ren).’

Just another paragraph about what appears to be unique to California.  Mediation is Confidential.  Well, no it isn’t — if it’s child custody mediation.”

The iaws governing mandatory mediation in California nave resulted in a unique opportunityto study mandatory mediation in child custody disputes for families that do not reach agreement. Most mediation in California is confidential, because the legislature recognizes the valueofalternativedisputeresolutioningeneralandmediationinparticular. California’scivil code provides for confidentialityin all mediation, with the exception of child custody mediation. The confidentiality statute for child custody mediation is different:

FamilyCodeQ3177. Confidentialityofprioceedings Mediation proceedings pursuant to this chapter shall be held in private and shall be confidential. {{{BUT — only the word ‘BUT’ doesn’t show up here to inform the casual reader}}} All communications, verbal or written, from the parties to the mediator made in the proceeding are official information within the meaning of Section 1040 of the Evidence Code.

The first sentence of the statute is similar to the one in the civil code. The second sentence, however, makes confidentiality an illusion in certain circumstances that depend, in part, on geography. Each jurisdiction is allowed to decide whether custody mediation will retain strict confidentiality. Counties may decide to allow their child custody mediators to make formal custody recommendations to the court following unsuccessful mediation.

IN CASE you were wondering how “increased noncustodial parent time” was obtained — this is where mediators can come in.  That’s how I became a noncustodial parent overnight also (well it took a few short days — weeks — for a mediator to rubberstamp the criminal violation of a physical custody order according to California Penal Code.  while most of us would tend to think that the criminal violation should pre-empt a family law violation, in fact– at least in my wonderful state — these entities work quite well at bouncing cases between criminal and family, or OUT of criminal INTO family, where it’s decriminalized because it’s a family experiencing conflict — not a person who stole children, or knocked a parent upside the face during a high-conflict moment, or lots of them.

Well, that’s enough from the 2003 National Institute of Justice funded STUDY, and back to the 2011 (report rec’d) NIJ funded STUDY:

Despite three decades of scholarly research on numerous aspects of divorce mediation, there is no comprehensive understanding of the short- and long-term outcomes for couples legally ordered to mediation to resolve custody and parenting time disputes orfor those using free (or low cost) conciliation court mediation services to do so. Even less is known about the use or effectiveness of court-mandated mediation services among couples alleging intimate partner abuse (IPA)

Pre-Conference Institute – Friday, February 3

“Child Abuse, What You Need To Know” – Leslie Drozd, Ph.D.

Plenary Speakers: “Long-Term Consequences of Divorce for Children” – Paul R. Amato, Ph.D.

(Dr. Amato is from Penn State.  I would like to hear his commentary on the Sandusky/Paterno situation.   Be that as it may, here is some of his funding, and notice the national council on family relations.  SO long as family relations continue this strained, people like this will never run out of work:

Several research awards including Stanley Cohen Distinguished Research Award, Association of Family and Conciliation Courts; Reuben Hill Award from the National Council on Family Relations

Fellow of the National Council on Family Relations

His site also links to a 2009 USA Today article, “Federally Funded ad campaign holds up value of marriage,” in which we learn another role Dr. Amato plays, when HHS gets involved:

Faced with such numbers, the federal government is funding a $5 million national media campaign that launches this month, extolling the virtues of marriage for those ages 18 to 30.

“We’re not telling people ‘Get married’ but ‘Don’t underestimate the benefits of marriage,’ ” says Paul Amato, a Pennsylvania State University sociologist and adviser to the National Healthy Marriage Resource Center, which is spearheading the campaign.  {{which is itself a joint HHS/Public Strategies Inc. type WEBSITE}}

The resource center, a federally funded virtual clearinghouse, works under an agreement with the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ Administration for Children and Families.

Where else one can find Dr. Amato, of PENN STATE UNIV… — helping spearhead the OMI, which as I’ve shown, started by taking $10 million (check site for exact##) of “contingency TANF funds,” quickly bypassing the legislature, and starting to promote marriage for (almost) everybody in Oklahoma, a pattern that has been followed from state to state.  By now (if you read my blog) you should recognize several of these names, esp. the 2nd and 7th.  Plus Markman and Stanley of Denver, who are probably very happy that their business PREP, Inc. was chosen as the vehicle….

OMI Research Advisory Group Members:

Paul Amato, PhD – Pennsylvania State University
Bill Coffin, MA – National Association for Relationship and Marriage Education
Ronald B. Cox, Jr., PhD, CFLE – Oklahoma State University
Kathryn Edin, PhD – Harvard University
David Fournier, PhD – Oklahoma State University, Emeritus
Sarah Halpern-Meekin, PhD – Bowling Green State University
Ron Haskins, PhD – Brookings Institution
Alan J. Hawkins, PhD – Brigham Young University
Christine Johnson, PhD – Oklahoma State University
Pamela Jordan, PhD, RN – University of Washington
Howard Markman, PhD – University of Denver
Theodora Ooms, MSW – Marriage and Family Policy Expert
Galena K. Rhoades, PhD – University of Denver
Scott Stanley, PhD – University of Denver

YEP — Longitudinal and Sociological Studies of “Marriage” and “Divorce” have been very good to certain types of professionals.  Just remember the “previously published as None Dare Call It Conspiracy,” and how the move to collectivism included taking over American Education and moving it to the collective model, featuring social sciences, and AWAY from the individual, rights-based model, which is problemmatic for future distatorships.

This is an Amato article published in The Future of Children (Princeton), which you can look up who’s funding THAT.  Here’s a Diagram of Well-being indicators:  “Life-Span Adjustment of Children to their Parents’ Divorce”  Be sure not to mis “Figure 1” which is a dramatic pictorial of the index of well-being based on whether a family is divorced, or “intact.”   This appears to be from April 2008, and shows him as associate professor of sociology at Univ of Nebraska/Lincoln.  As expected of the about 87 footnotes, not including the ones that are to his own work, others are to well-known AFCC people (wallerstein/kelly/janet r. johnston) and others to those also on the fatherhood foundation-funded publishing circuit, such as Sara McLanahan. And it goes on, and on, and of course . . . . ON….

here’s a random source (from apparently a religious site) and this is among the footnotes.  Here we see Amato AND Markman AND Stanley all together in one cite — not bad, eh?  Notice (guess that’s just part of sociology), the concern with labeling things according to ethnicity and trying to calculate whether this, along with the marriage factor, has some influence (that could be manipulated pro or con?) on adolescent sexuality.

Don’t you sometimes wish all the experts would publish less and  _ u _ k  more?  And give the rest of us a break?  Perhaps then they could study their own anatomy and relationships for a change; it’d be about as equally valid as collectively studying others in theory!

DeMaris, A., Rao, K. V. 1992. Premarital Cohabitation and Subsequent Marital Stability in the United States: A Reassessment. Journal of Marriage and the Family 54: 178-190.
Kamp Dush, C. M., Cohan, C. L., & Amato, P. R. 2003. The relationship between cohabitation
and marital quality and stability: Changes across cohorts? Journal of Marriage and Family, 65, 539-549.
Phillips, J. A. and M. M. Sweeney. 2005. Premarital Cohabitation and the Risk of Marital Disruption among White, Black, and Mexican American Women. Journal of Marriage and Family 67:296-314.
J. Teachman.  2003.  Premarital Sex, Premarital Cohabitation, and the Risk of Subsequent Marital Dissolution Among Women. Journal of Marriage and Family 65: 444-455.
Stanley, S. M., Amato, P. R., Johnson, C. A., & Markman, H. J. 2006. Premarital education, marital quality, and marital stability: Findings from a large, random, household survey. Journal of Family Psychology 20: 117-126.
Paik, A. 2011. Adolescent Sexuality and the Risk of Marital Dissolution. Journal of Marriage and Family 73: 472DOI: 10.1111/j.1741-3737.2010.00819.x.

(from the AzAFCC in 2006 conference, again):

“Domestic Violence and Parenting Evaluations” – William Austin, Ph.D. “Stalking Behavior” – Mindy Mechanic, Ph.D. & Maureen O’Connor, Ph.D.

(Probably this William Austin….)

Austin Child Custody Services dba (303) 670-6767 voice   (303) 217-8990 fax Office: 710 Kipling, Ste. 306, Lakewood, CO 80215

Dr. Austin and Austin Child Custody Services provide a broad range of forensic services to attorneys and courts within Colorado and in other states. He is licensed in Colorado and North Carolina. He provides services in other states only if permitted by state law. Almost all states allow out-of-state licensed psychologists to provide services on a temporary basis. Dr. Austin specializes child custody cases when there are issues concerning relocation and domestic violence/intimate partner violence.

Forensic evaluation services: Dr. Austin provides Child Custody Evaluations. In Colorado, custodial evaluations include Parental Responsibility Evaluation and Child & Family Investigator. All evaluations are neutral, impartial evaluations conducted with an appropriate court order. Parties involved in the litigation must sign a Statement of Understanding that describes issues involved in the evaluation, procedures, and fees.

Attorney Consultation: Dr. Austin provides several forensic consultation services. . . .

He often provides testimony on the relocation risk assessment model and research on the effects of relocation on children of divorce. His forensic models on partner violence include how to assess the credibility of allegations of partner violence and violence risk assessment in custody cases. He is currently developing with colleagues an integrated theoretical framework for considering partner violence in custody cases that revises the new typology of partner violence and emphasizes behavioral dimensions and research-based risk factors in developing parenting plans. Instructional or educational testimony may be combined with testimony as a Reviewer.

Dr. Austin has published numerous professional articles and book chapters on forensic approaches to conducting child custody issues. The publications are available in pdf form from this website. He is a recognized national expert on relocation and domestic/intimate partner violence as issues that arise in custody cases, and on child custody methodology. Dr. Austin has given over 50 professional workshops and lectures on child custody evaluation for mental health and legal professionals, and law schools. Dr. Austin was the co-chair of the task force that developed the Model Standards of Practice for Child Custody Evaluation that is published by the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts (AFCC).

Yeah, well, he is a social psychologist from North Carolina & Wisconsin, and no attorney.  His website is GOING to have a “gatekeeping and alienation” part — but it’s not up yet (probably too busy on task forces and with professional associations, including the National Council on Family Relations(getting nice marriage/fatherhood grants these days, and very conservative).   He is going to protest relocation for the most part, and of course no way is a parent going to actually be able to leave a very abusive situation WITH children and actually protect them (or herself) without some behavioral dimension assessment, if he has something to do with it.

ONE WEEK, OR JUST OVER, IN “DOMESTICVIOLENCECRIMEWATCH.COM“

The next time you run across some social science prognostications, please remember how many, how diverse, and likely how AVOIDABLE many of these deaths were.    Some occurred in front of children.  Some occurred surrounding a child support hearing (after protective order).  SOME (though not most) were a woman (wife, or girlfriend) offing an ex.  Most egregious, on the side, was a case where families were suing for damages — someone should’ve listened when others warned about a dangerous COP, who ended up killing 3 women (and himself) off-duty.  Here’s that info:

Families of women killed by off-duty Clackamas deputy file $8 million lawsuit

Published: Thursday, February 09, 2012, 4:45 PM     Updated: Friday, February 10, 2012, 6:05 AM

 By Steve Mayes, The Oregonian 

here’s about how that went:

The families of two women murdered by an off-duty Clackamas County sheriff’s sergeant filed an $8 million lawsuit Thursday, alleging that the county, Sheriff Craig Roberts and two of his top aides knew the man was dangerously unstable but failed to intervene.

Roberts and other defendants knew Sgt. Jeffrey A. Grahn presented a threat to his wife, Charlotte, and that he was emotionally unsteady, angry, depressed and had substance-abuse problems, according to the wrongful-death lawsuit filed in Multnomah County.

On Feb. 12, 2010, Grahn confronted Charlotte Grahn and two of her friends, Victoria Schulmerich and Kathleen Hoffmeister, at the M&M Restaurant & Lounge. 

{{please note the time of year, though it was 2010}}:

Grahn, who was legally drunk, entered the Gresham bar, argued with his wife and threw a drink in Schulmerich’s face. He then grabbed Charlotte Grahn by her hair, pulled her outside and shot her in the head with a Glock .40-caliber pistol. He returned to the bar with his gun drawn and killed Schulmerich and Hoffmeister with shots to the head.

Grahn again went outside and, standing next to his wife’s body, committed suicide.  . . . . . .

A year before the killings, the Sheriff’s Office received reports that Grahn was abusive and potentially explosive and asked the Portland Police Bureau to investigate. 

“The Sheriff’s Office knew that Grahn was violent, abusive, and out of control. They were specifically warned that he was likely to kill his wife, his family, and himself. Nonetheless, the Sheriff’s Office intervened to prevent the Portland Police from sending their investigation of Grahn to the Clackamas County District Attorney. Now, four people are dead,” said Greg Kafoury of Kafoury & McDougal law firm, which represents the Hoffmeister estate.

If the case goes to trial, it will shed light on how the Sheriff’s Office and other law enforcement agencies handle domestic violence issues involving their employees.

In case there are ANY remaining questions to just HOW dangerous this was, and how it was NOT responded to properly, here’s a bit more of the article:

According to police reports obtained by The Oregonian, Charlotte Grahn allegedly told one of her husband’s co-workers, a deputy, that she was the victim of domestic violence but the deputy did not report the incident.

The reports also show that a couple — both law enforcement officers and long-time friends of the Grahns — told the Sheriff’s Office they had serious concerns about Jeffrey Grahn’s behavior. The friends and Charlotte Grahn’s sister “fear .. that they will receive a phone call one day that Jeffrey has killed everybody in his family then himself,” according to a report written by Undersheriff Dave Kirby in April 2009, 10 months before the shootings. One of the friends said Grahn had “gone off the deep end” and drinks “like there’s no tomorrow,” Kirby noted.

Charlotte Grahn {{that’s the WIFE!}} told an investigator that Jeffrey Grahn exhibited signs of depression and suicidal behavior and was worried that if it became known he had obtained a prescription for anti-depressants, it could affect his employment. 

Portland police investigators said Grahn was depressed, angry, drinking heavily and occasionally suicidal.

Just in case the significance of this has not yet sunk in — sheriffs and police are often to whom women may turn when they feel in danger, even still these days.  Mentally we associate them with “law enforcement” and believe, naturally, that this is what they are for, which is why they have extraordinary powers compared to the average citizens, including weapons training, tactical training and sometimes weapons.   Plus the ability to arrest (apart from any citizen’s arrest, which how many people ever know about, or use?  Or, are backed up if the do attempt to use?)

Certainly, and obviously, it is very stressful to be a police officer.  On the other hand, it’s also stressful to contemplate how restraining orders are just a piece of paper, some cops brush off warning signs, former batterers stay loose and sometimes then, being more irate, escalate. . . .   Many things in life can be stressful.  BUT — when you next hear AFCC in conference, just remember that Valentine’s Day along with almost any other holiday, can be a very tough and frightening time for some.

I personally think we ought to “cool it” on exalting and promoting marriage.  It ain’t all it’s cracked up to be, and some seem to take disappointment better than others.   Whether it is or isn’t, the last thing ANYONE needs is his and her own government pushing the institution for its own reasons, most of which do not have to do with individuals’ welfare ,or in the best interests of children.

NOTE — there’s one below from Alabama — an incident that was reported last Friday.  Two children (ages 6 & 7) witnessed the violence, which involved

death by stabbing (it seems) of their father and his girlfriend.  Just a note — it seems he was custodial? and they were returned to the care of their mother.

Can you imagine this?  Yet here it is — and we are concerned about father ABSENCES? ???   This is a man who got his kids, got a girlfriend, and someone killed both of them (which was which is unclear) and the fathered-children “got” to witness all this blood and then — alone with the two bodies — go seek help from a neighbor.  They wanted a ride to school. . . . .

AND — FYI — the site is also advertising, or possibly promoting one solution or another — for example, I note a “Crisis in the Family Courts” post (predictable).  I believe it’s clear enough where I stand on that one . ….  As well as on all the domestic violence studies, when this level of violence is still ongoing.  Perhaps less studies and more self-defense might help, but — bottom line — it’s probably going to have something to do with more equality (gender equality, starting in the Congress), and reduction of the religious domination of women by men overall (that’d be a cold day in hell . . . . . ) — which would be something of a deterrent.   Or at least stop giving churches, mosques, synagogues, temples of ANY kind, even pretty ones, even ones that feed th homeless or sometimes shelter them —  tax perks (nonprofit status) — AND grants….!  If the product is that great, it doesn’t need a tax perk.

The St. Paul girl case, below, is particularly horrific.  The woman held captive and BEAT for 3 days was the the mother of a little girl, and their relationship had started out abusive (it says) — and when father was 17 and mother 15.   He would’ve killed her, but apparently after 3 days of beatings he decided to go to work (taking car keys, cell phone, and laptopS) — that brings back some memories — there being snow on the ground — but she escaped to neighbors, and her family (where was her family BEFORE?) took her to the hospital.

Another note to people fleeing — maybe try not to stay with your parents, it gets dangerous, as the accounts will say.

I believe in light of this record here, that we should rethink the next round of grants to give “FUTURES WITHOUT VIOLENCE’ there share of $36 million, or $16 million, or whatever it is, to stop violence against women by teaching fathers, and international global leadership (etc.) — and insist they do something at home first — and PROVE it makes a dent — before getting any more.

Police Say Man Admits to Wife’s Murder Monday, February 13, 2012 Chattanooga, TN:  A Chattanooga man has admitted to police that he shot and killed his wife the day before Valentines.  Police found Elizabeth Hardnett, 34, shot at least four times inside a business at 1907 Daisy Street, near the intersection of North Orchard Knob and Daisy Street.  » more at News Channel 9 Mother Says Vineland Murder Victim Was Not Engaged to Man Accused of Killing Her Vineland, NJ:  Britton Loyden and the man accused of killing her last week had no relationship for the past 16 months, Loyden’s mother, Tracy Freese, said.  Ismael Pierce, 24, of the 900 block of South Spring Road, is scheduled to be arraigned Tuesday on a charge of murder, Cumberland County Prosecutor Jennifer Webb-McRae said.  Pierce is the father of Loyden’s 1-year-old son, and on social media sites MySpace and Twitter, the two talked about their relationship before her murder.  » more at Press of Atlantic City Carolinas Mystery: Missing Woman, Dead Fiancée Mount Pleasant, SC:  Dara Lee Watson left her parents’ store in downtown Boone a week ago Monday with fiancée David Hedrick, headed back to their home in the Charleston suburb of Mount Pleasant.  Watson’s boss and a friend received text messages from her phone Wednesday, but nobody could reach her by email or voice.  » more at Charlotte Observer Read more here: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2012/02/14/3011718/carolinas-mystery-missing-woman.html#storylink=cpy Police: Ex-Boyfriend Killed Tucson Woman, Then Attempted Suicide Monday, February 13, 2012 Tucson, AZ:  Tucson Police believe the ex-boyfriend of a Tucson woman allegedly shot and killed her, then turned the gun on himself – but survived, police say.  The woman who lived in the southeast-side home where the shooting occurred was in her 30’s, and was a mother of two young children.  » more at KVOA TV Boyfriend Charged With Murder in Neptune City Stabbing Monday, February 13, 2012 Neptune City, NJ:   Homicide investigators have charged a local man in connection with the stabbing death of a borough woman Monday.  Jarrone J. Perry, 33, of Morris Avenue, is charged with the killing of his girlfriend, Kamealah Talmadge, 30, of the same address, according to Marc LeMieux of the Monmouth County Prosecutor’s Office.  » more at Asbury Park Press Husband Arrested in Fatal Shooting of Wife and Niece Monday, February 13, 2012 Houston, TX:  A 30-year-old man has been arrested in the shooting deaths of his estranged wife and her niece at a home in northwest Harris County early Monday morning.  Ricardo Jose Prado Jr, 30, is charged with capital murder in the deaths of Rachel Prado, 29, and 19-year-old Jasmine Nicole Rhodes at their home in the 7800 block of Mosewood near Vernwood about 1:20 a.m. Monday, according to the Harris County Sheriff’s Office.  » more at Houston Chronicle Kingsport Man Accused of Stabbing Girlfriend to Death Saturday, February 11, 2012 Kingsport, TN:  A Kingsport man accused of stabbing his live-in girlfriend sometime overnight Saturday was arrested Sunday morning in Johnson City.  Mark W. Breeding, 46, 1037 Bloomingdale Pike Apt. 323, Kingsport, has been charged with first-degree murder by Kingsport police in connection to the stabbing death of his girlfriend, Beverly “Birdie” Hartsock.  » more at timesnews.net Man Dies Following Suicide at Gun Range, Linked to Wife’s Death in Tamarac Saturday, February 11, 2012 Tamarac, FL:  A suicide at a South Florida gun range led to the discovery of a second dead body in a Tamarac home as BSO investigators discovered it wasn’t just a suicide but a murder-suicide.  According to BSO investigators, a 52-year-old man walked into the Arizona Shooting Range, located at 4317 North State Road 7 around 10:40 a.m. where he rented a gun and shot himself in the head.  » more at Miami Herald Wife of Man Found Dead in Lower Valley Apartment Arrested on Suspicion of Murder Saturday, February 11, 2012 El Paso, TX:  The El Paso Police Department’s Crimes Against Persons unit has arrested a woman on suspicion of murder in connection with the early morning death of her husband.  Fire Medical Services and El Paso police responded at about 5:30 a.m. Saturday to an apartment at 7840 Knights Drive in the Lower Valley where they found 34-year-old Salvador Juarez dead.  » more at El Paso Times Spouse Held on $500K in Death Friday, February 10, 2012 Douglas, MA:  A former International Arm Wrestling Federation arm wrestler is behind bars in connection with the death of his wife.  Police Friday night arrested Allen M. Stilkey and charged him in the death of Lisa A. Stilkey.  The 44-year-old woman fell through a second-story window of their home at 38 Gilboa St. and died of her injuries.  » more at Telegram Ex-Boyfriend Surrenders in Fatal Drive-By Friday, February 10, 2012 Covington, GA:  A man wanted in the drive-by slaying of his former girlfriend turned himself in to Covington police Saturday, authorities said.  Hannibal Wayne McMullen, 47, was charged with murder in the death early Friday of Ketitra Techelle Jones, who had filed for a temporary order of protection against the man.  » more at Atlanta Journal Constitution S.F. BART Saxophonist is Fugitive Killer, Cops Say Albuquerque, NM:  A popular BART station saxophone busker was arrested this week on suspicion of murdering his ex-wife 25 years ago, and had been on the run for decades, even while serenading commuters, authorities said Friday.  The “jazz man” often told BART riders his name was Garrick Sherrod when he played in places like San Francisco’s Embarcadero Station. But when authorities arrested him Monday, they knew him as Ronald Brewington, a man who allegedly shot and killed 37-year-old Diedre Brewington in her Albuquerque apartment in August 1987.  » more at San Francisco Chronicle Murder Suspect Dies in SWAT Standoff Friday, February 10, 2012 Houston, TX:  Two people were murdered Friday in northwest Houston. The suspect was on the loose until he took his own life Saturday evening.  Police said Friday that Diego Martinez shot and killed his wife, 40-year-old Martha Nava De Martinez, and a male friend who was visiting her — 31-year-old Omar Salazar.  » more at KTRK ABC 13 Man Claims He Was Asleep When Girlfriend Died; Charged With Murder Friday, February 10, 2012 Lincolnton, NC:  A Lincolnton man has been charged with murder after police say he called 911 and said his girlfriend had died while he was sleeping on the couch.  According to Lincolnton Police, 41-year-old Jerry Alvin Black, Junior, called 911 on Friday afternoon at 1:30 p.m. and told the dispatcher that his girlfriend was dead.  » more at WBTV Two Young Children Witness Murder-Suicide in Eight Mile Friday, February 10, 2012 Prichard, AL:  A young boy trying to get a ride to school Friday morning led a neighbor back to his house where his father and father’s girlfriend were dead. Prichard police described the Eight Mile-area case as a murder-suicide.  The dead were Ronald Coleman Jr. and Charmeall Powe, both 39.  » more at al.com Man Shot Stranger, Stabbed Own Family in Deadly SWAT Standoff in Deerfield Beach Thursday, February 9, 2012 Deerfield Beach, FL:  The man who led a deadly 7-hour SWAT standoff at a Deerfield Beach RV park shot an elderly stranger before bursting into the home and stabbing his own wife, two sons and himself, authorities said Friday.  According to the Broward Sheriff’s Office, 41-year-old William De Jesus, from Port Orange, drove his red Ford Mustang into the Highland Woods RV park at 900 Northeast 48th Street around 6:20 p.m.  With De Jesus were his 37-year-old wife, Deanna, and sons Samson, 7, and Jeshiah, 9, the BSO said.  » more at NBC Miami Victim Came Back for One Day Wednesday, February 8, 2012 Marion, OH:  A woman who had moved away out of fear was killed the day she returned.  Police found Amy Lynn Aldrich, 30, dead from a gunshot wound at her cousin’s home, 617 Bartram Ave.  “She was a beautiful person inside and out,” said Margaret Reed, Aldrich’s mother.  » more at Marion Star Afton Teen Dies of Gunshot Wounds Thursday, February 9, 2012 Jay, OK:  A teenager who deputies believe was shot by his estranged girlfriend has died, Delaware County Undersheriff Ron Teel said Friday.  The name of the 16-year-old Afton boy has not been released.  Deputies believe Jazmine Flynn, 18, of Bernice, shot the teen before shooting herself.  Flynn was found dead at the scene from a single gunshot wound, Teel said.   » more at Tulsa World Autopsy Says New Bern Deaths Murder-Suicide New Bern, NC:  Preliminary autopsy results show a deadly double shooting last week in New Bern was a murder-suicide.  Brittany Jones and Johnnie Neely were found dead inside a home on Julia Clay Street Friday afternoon.  » more at WITN TV

There is so much really bad social policy flying around, mixed in with politics and religion, I keep having to remove chunks of explanatory material from the middle of my posts, and store them on another one by subject matter.  It’s as though too many basic concepts have not been digested, indications of sleepwalking among hordes of individuals, as indicated by inability to process information and come up with a coherent framework for where it came from.

And no one has time to constantly re-diagram the wheel.

This one was introduction to a post alerting “Battered Mothers (Losing) Custody” to who’s been running their conferences.  Wake up!

This summary is directed to ladies because, for reasons probably relating to the general tendency of culture to assume that women don’t need to be told about the nuts and bolts of . . . .. dollars and cents . . . . when it comes to conferences and writings on WTF happened in the courtroom.  Somehow, men seem to grasp this reality a little better, even though I KNOW many of the mothers involved here actually have worked, if not run their own businesses, or someone else’s.  But collectively, they also apparently thought the United States was a land of equal opportunity simply because we got the vote and some feminists made a difference back in the 1970s, and groups like “Violence Against Women Act” grantees are saying they are stopping Violence Against Women, or are just about to . . . . .

So I’m publishing something of a quick review of how we got Access Visitation and why your court hearing is an out-come based, finance-influenced matter hooked into Federal/State balances and social science theory about what causes poverty, although possibly what’s contributing to it is the concept that people are here on earth to become subjects of (OR facilitate) running social science demonstrations upon them from afar.  From VERY afar . . . .

Once Again from the Top, Ladies. . . . . Wrap Your Heads Around the Business Model, Please!

ONCE AGAIN, FROM THE TOP:

FEDERAL FUNDING BASED ON SOCIAL SCIENCE THEORY IS RUNNING

STATE PROGRAMS, PARTICULARLY FAMILY COURT-ASSOCIATED PROGRAMS.

THE TWO PRIMARY ORGANIZATIONS WHICH SEEM TO HAVE FACILITATED AND DEVELOPED THIS

WERE ORIGINALLY AND ARE NOW — ASSOCIATION OF FAMILY & CONCILIATION COURTS + (THE) CHILDREN’S RIGHTS COUNCIL

OBVIOUSLY PLANS OF THIS SCOPE REQUIRE (AND OBTAIN) ONGOING FUNDING:

HOW HANDY THEN, THAT INDIVIDUALS HELPING FOUND AFCC /CRC ALSO HAD

A CLEAR UNDERSTANDING (FROM THE START) THAT A CLOSE CONNECTION TO D.C.

AND FROM THERE, THE NATION,

JUST MIGHT BE ENABLED BY EXPRESSING MAJOR CONCERN WITH THE ISSUE OF CHILD SUPPORT.

AND OF COURSE, FATHERHOOD.

I’m not spoon-feeding this information by links.  It’s all over my blog, with links.   One of the first organizations that (unnoticed, but unbelievably influential) which, when I saw it, the lights began to come on — was this Center for Policy Research in Denver, Colorado.    Being somewhat research minded myself, I simply googled the principals and noticed who they were publishing with, which led to the understanding that CPR is the nonprofit and PSI (Policy Studies Inc.) the for-profit.  One evaluates, the other operates — and many publications cooperatively bear both corporation’s names on the front page and at the bottom.   People, this is NOT “rocket science.”  They tell you what they do — just failed to tell you what other pies their principals have their fingers in, or how comprehensive was he original strategy, and how it’s developed:

The italicized terms above are particularly fatherhood-related.  I don’t know which years CPR added these fields of study; but we do know that “Child Access” is a term from an associated group, “CRC.” .. . .   while these ARE listed alphabetically, I still find it interesting that “violence & IPV” is last.  It could’ve been labeled “abuse” or put the “IPV” first, or used the term “Domestic Violence.”  However, CPR is smart enough to know which gender is the majority in the US Congress, the Supreme Court, and most state-level governments, with whom they work closely.

As this modest website shows (“about us”) (plus, notice subdued colors — no flashy graphics or animations, such as is found at “NFI” or “fatherhood.gov” etc.) — ONLY 7 personnel are involved:  (there were 6 when I first noticed them).  3 Ph.D.’s, an M.A., a MPA, a B.A. and an Office Manager.  And — what’s interesting – all are female.  Now THAT is unusual.  There is a director, and an associated director, and everyone else (except Office Manager) is “Research Associate (or “Assistant.”).   They are Jessica Pearson, Nancy Thoennes and Jane Venohr, as to Ph.D.’s.

Liz Richards of NAFCJ.net identified long ago that Jessica Pearson was also a co-founder of AFCC :

Another AFCC founding official is Jessica Pearson, President of Center for Policy Research of Denver, Colorado, which is a primary consultant to the Department of Health and Human Services – Administration for Children & Families (HHS-ACF) which includes OCSE.  Pearson/AFCC have been using ther influence for many years to create pro-father programs and protocols which are steered to the pro-father court professionals who train others in the anti-mother evaluation tactics such as PAS.  She has been a frequent speaker at CRC and AFCC conferences and works closely with other fathers rights collaborators to promote PAS in government program

CPR doesn’t receive major HHS Grants — or even Contracts (USAspending.gov) — it doesn’t need to

• Total Dollars:$171,514
• Transactions:1 – 10 of 10

OTHER ENABLING ASSOCIATIONS IN THIS PLANETARY SYSTEM INCLUDE

BAR ASSOCIATIONS (ABA, & STATE/COUNTY-LEVEL), PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSOCIATIONS (APA)

ASSOCIATIONS OF MARITAL THERAPISTS (AAMFT) AND ASSOCIATIONS OF MATRIMONIAL LAWYERS (AAML).

HOW HANDY THAT THE FOUNDER OF CRC HAS SOME CROSS-AFFILIATIONS.

THE BASIC PREMISE OF THE AFCC/CRC COMBO IS TO FORCE COUNTIES TO PAY FOR

MARITAL COUNSELLING FOR ALL BECAUSE DIVORCE IS SO BAD FOR SOCIETY.

(TRANSLATION:  FOR THE WORK LIVES OF PEOPLE DEPENDENT FOR FOOD & SHELTER ON STEADY EMPLOYMENT IN CORPORATIONS,

AND INSTITUTIONAL EDUCATION OF THEIR CHILDREN + CHILD CARE FOR AFTER SCHOOL

DIVORCE HAS BEEN VERY GOOD FOR MANY OF THE ABOVE PROFESSIONALS,

BUT OF COURSE TO SHOW EXACTLY HOW GOOD, AND HOW, WOULD BE  BAD BUSINESS POLICY.

PROBLEM:  MARRIAGE IS NOT GOOD FOR EVERYONE

(SEE INJURY, DEATHS, POVERTY, AND TRAUMA, COMMONLY CALLED (NOW) ‘DOMESTIC VIOLENCE).

THIS IS IMPOSSIBLE TO COMPLETELY ERADICATE FROM THE PUBLIC AWARENESS.

PARTICULARLY WITH ALL THOSE (1970S, 1980S) GRASS ROOTS BATTERED WOMEN’S SHELTERS AND ADVOCATES (FEMINAZIS) ALL OVER THE PLACE..

THE POLICY SOLUTION TO THIS INCLUDES BUYING THEM OUT.  ECONOMIC CONTROL TO SILENCE THE TRUTH.

IT USUALLY GETS DOWN TO ECONOMICS, AND IS ABOUT THAT.

THIS IS WHY IT’S SO IMPORTANT TO KEEP THE FOCUS ON PSYCHOLOGICAL ATTRIBUTES, MENTAL HEALTH, AND FAMILY RELATIONS.

IT CAN ALSO BE SOLD, TO TAXPAYERS, AS A SOCIAL GOOD (HOW TO HANDLE THE POOR).

SO, IT IS NECESSARY TO REFRAME THE ISSUE AND TURN IT TO A POLICY BENEFIT —

WHICH IS TO SAY – – – – — INSTITUTE MORE TRAININGS AND INTERVENTIONS.

THUS IN THIS WORLD, ANY NORMAL HUMAN PROBLEM CAN BECOME A PROFIT

AND SIMPLE SOLUTIONS TO SUCH HUMAN PROBLEMS ARE A FINANCIAL “DEBIT” ON THE

SOLUTIONS-PROVIDERS’ BALANCE SHEETS.

HENCE IT’S IN THEIR BEST INTERESTS TO FORM COALITIONS

PART OF THE DEAL OF “COALITIONS” IS THAT WHAT IS REALLY A ONE-THEORY ORGANIZATION

CAN SEEM TO VALIDATE THE THEORY BY MULTIPLE MEMBERS AFFIRMING EACH OTHER

EVEN IF THE THEORY OBVIOUSLY SUCKS.

NEWS-FLASH (From last Friday, Pennsylvania):

The bullying and extreme terrorism in the family court realm has really gotten out of hand.   That ongoing judicial incites some people to kill each other, or blow up their houses with little boys inside, who might not otherwise have done so is just collateral damage in a good cause, fewer mouths to feed, sells newspapers:  

 “This all happened just days after a judge denied Powell custody of his boys. Leach said there was what he called an online cyber bullying effort to keep Powell from getting custody. Leach said he believed this should have played out in the courtroom not online” . . . 

ACOMA, Wash., (ABC 4 News) – A judge ordered that the children of Josh and Susan Powell will stay with Susan’s parents while Josh undergoes psycho-sexual evaluation. Attorneys also discussed pornographic images discovered by West Valley City Police on Josh’s computer, KOMO-TV reported.

“Psycho-sexual evaluation” and Supervised Visitation for the father . . . . after his (missing) wife’s parents got custody of the two boys:

Authorities placed Josh’s two sons in the custody of Susan’s parents after their grandfather’s arrest. The Cox’s attorney, Steven Downing, said that the children were at risk living in Steve’s home with child pornography. However, the judge did grant Josh supervised visitation rights with his son. (just one, or both?)

In a separate issue, a judge issued an injunction forbidding Josh or Steve from publishing the missing woman’s journals.

Supervised visitation situations are off the chart BAD & a form of extortion, no matter which state one is in.
We had one in California (speaking of missing mothers — Nina Reiser — who went missing on a court-ordered exchange of the children; after her ex was convicted of murder (despite no body) he plea-bargained it down by showing authorities where he’d buried her.).   Another involved an SV person who was under investigation for criminal sexual assault of an animal!   (incidentally, the Commissioner (not Judge) assigning this person, at recommendation of a trusty local Ph.D. custody evaluator — happens to be a prominent AFCC judge and at least formerly on the board of the SF based Kids Turn, which is a “parent education” & access/visitation type nonprofit, see my blog.  DOn’t you think this represents great wisdom?  Having a child supervised by a person who was into sex with animals and a slave/master relationship (being the slave)? ??

By Dave BohmanAction 16 Investigates 4:52 p.m. EST, November 17, 2011

More information has been learned about why federal officials are investigating a program in the Lackawanna County family court system.In September, and again this week, FBI agents confiscated records from family court.The guardian ad litem is a court appointed lawyer who represents a child while its mother and father try to settle custody cases.

One or both parents are required to pay the fees for the guardian ad litem’s services. Now, sources tell Newswatch 16, federal agents are looking to see if parents were cheated and the fees were pocketed.  A woman who does not want to be identified because she`s testified to law enforcement agents claims she was cheated out of thousands of dollars during supervised visits with her young son. . . . Court papers show a federal grand jury directed the Lackawanna County courts to give investigators every case supervised by attorney Danielle Ross. She runs the Lackawanna County guardian ad litem program, and assigns caseworkers for supervised visits.

The woman said Ross was the guardian ad litem for her son. The woman claims she was overcharged between $1,500 and $2,000 in the last two and a half years.

Lackawanna County Guardian Ad Litem Program

ADMINISTRATOR:
Ann Marie Termini, Ed.S., M.S.
Lackawanna County Family Court (963-6512) and Clarks Summit, PA (586-5669)

HISTORY:
The current Guardian Ad Litem Program has been in effect for approximately five (5) years.

and, . . . .

SUPERVISED VISITS

The Scranton Area Family Center offers supervised visit services based on the availability of funding.  . . . (my link shows the State-Contracted “Family Centers” and an * by this one shows it also has a Promoting Responsible Fatherhood program.  Someone should look those contracts up!

2 FAmIly

Guardians ad Litem: Bridging the Gap Between High-Conflict** Divorce and Domestic Violence

Hon. Chester Harhut ~ Danielle Ross, JD ~ Ann Marie Termini, Ed.S., MS, LPC

(it also appears that Termini charged Lackawanna county a hotel bill for this conference).

In his role as Family Court Judge and President Judge, Judge Harhut moved to integrate human services, mental health and drug and alcohol treatment into the legal setting with the objective of alleviating conflict while helping families achieve a permanent solution to family issues. He established a categorical system of conflict with concomitant programming and services to help families in each level of conflict. The theory is that families coming through the court system are in crisis. They need patience, understanding, cooperation and services to help them overcome these difficulties and move them into position to resolve their own disputes.

The request for the mandatory budget is $34.5 billion, an increase of $1.1 billion from the FY 2011 current law level and includes policy increases of $1.4 billion in FY 2012 and $6.4 billion over five years. The mandatory budget:

• •

Invests an additional $2.billion over ten years in a new Child Support and Fatherhood Initiative designed to encourage non-custodial parents to work, support their children, and play an active role in their children’s lives.  [[$2 billion/10 years = $2,000,000,000/10= $200,000,000/YEAR . . . ]]  {{A/V grants have been $10 million/year at least, since 1996, but that’s not enough yet ….}}
OR, stated at American Humane Association.org:   Summary of the President’s Proposed FY 2012 Child Welfare Budget

Promote Fatherhood. The Budget promotes strong family relationships by encouraging fathers to take responsibility for the emotional and financial well-being of their children, changing policies so that more of their support reaches their children, and continuing a commitment to vigorous child support enforcement.

The Budget provides $1 billion over 10 years to encourage States to pass through child support payments to families rather than retaining those payments.  The Budget also provides $570 million over 10 years for States to provide access and visitation services, which can strengthen a father’s relationship with his children and facilitate the payment of child support.

To help states through difficult fiscal times, in FY 2012 and 2013, the Budget provides an additional $300 million per year for State performance incentive payments, which continues an emphasis on program outcomes and efficiency. The Budget also provides for $75 million in Responsible Fatherhood grants and $75 million in Healthy Marriage grants in FY 2012.

Guiding Principles

A strong nation is made up of strong families. Every family deserves the chance that so many of our parents and grandparents had – to make a better future for themselves and their children. Strong families will always be front and center of President Obama’s agenda.

Progress

Strengthening Families

President Obama was raised by a single parent and knows the difficulties that young people face when their fathers are absent. He is committed to responsible fatherhood, by supporting fathers who stand by their families and encouraging young men to work towards good jobs in promising career pathways

LOOK — the parents are literally crying out under these grants, they are a farce, and keep people’s tensions very, very high.   They also expand and dilute (at the same time) the authority & responsibility of the courts.    They are a RIDICULOUS concept — and unbelievably egotistical.  Their failures do not seem to stop the funding the next year under “fatherhood promotion = better child support payments = less welfare.”  That’s, sorry, “BS.”

These grants, established under section 391 of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (Pub.L. 104–193, 110 Stat. 2258)—title III, section 469B of the Social Security Act —enable states to establish and administer programs that support and facilitate noncustodial parents’ access to and visitation with their children.

The use of the funds in California is limited by state statute to three types of programs:

• Supervised visitation and exchange services;
• Education about protecting children during family disruption; and
• Group counseling services for parents and children.

http://www.courts.ca.gov/documents/avgp.pdf :  (Fact Sheet, June 2011)

It’s not “Conspiracy” — the preferred term is  “Collaborations” (linked to Collaborations linked to Collaborations of Experts seeking, ever questing, for the Holy Grail  of a “Solution to End All Solutions.” 

Starting with the income tax (to redistribute wealth AWAY from the wealthy?), through “problem-solving courts,” and Faith-Based Offices.    The motive of all collaborators, without exception, is of course NOT to be questioned by menials (anyone receiving government services in any form and for any reason), OBVIOUSLY it’s because of innate generosity of the whole pack, and desire to end welfare as we knew it *poverty.

NONE DARE CALL IT CONSPIRACY

Joseph Edward Schmitz (born on August 28, 1956 in Milwaukee, Wisconsin)^[1] is an American lawyer, formerInspector Ge

neral of the Department of Defense and a former executive with Blackwater Worldwide, a private contractor providing security services to the U.S. State Department and the U.S. military.

Joseph Edward Schmitz is the son of the John G. Schmitz, former California State Senator, member of the U.S. House of Representatives, and U.S. Presidential candidate (1972). Schmitz attended Catholic schools as a child and Georgetown Preparatory School **  while his father served in Congress. He holds a Bachelor of Science (1978) from theUnited States Naval Academy in Annapolis, Maryland and a Juris Doctor (1986) from Stanford University. He was on the wrestling team at the Naval Academy.

Georgetown Preparatory School is an American Jesuit college preparatory school for grades 9 through 12. It is the oldest all boys school in the United States^[3], and the only Jesuit boarding school in the country. It is located in the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Washington on 90 acres (360,000 m²) in the suburban community of North Bethesda in Montgomery County, Maryland, outside of the District of Columbia.

“The Knights of Malta are the militia of the Pope, and are sworn to total obedience by a blood oath which is taken extremely seriously and to the death. The Pope as the head of the Vatican is also the head of a foreign national power.”
-”Encyclopedia of Freemasonry and Its Kindred Sciences” by Albert G. Mackey 33rd degree Mason, published by the Masonic History Company, Chicago, New York, & London, 1925: (Volume One, pp. 392-95)

cont’d…

“The painful saga of modern Arab-Muslim history evokes the battles fought in Crusades of the 11th century – when the Knights of Malta began their operations as a Christian militia whose mission it was to defend the land conquered by the Crusaders.

These memories return violently to mind with the discovery of links between the so-called security firms in Iraq such as Blackwater have historic links with the Order of Malta. You cannot exaggerate it. The Order of Malta is a hidden government or the most mysterious government in the world.”
– Jordanian MP Jamal Muhammad Abidat, from an editorial in the United Arab Emirates daily Al-Bayan entitled “The Knights of Malta – more than a conspiracy”. Abidat describes the role played by the Knights of Malta during the Crusades, and that the Order is playing a similar role in the Middle East today, citing the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Successor to Fascist Dictator Francisco Franco and Knight of Malta, King Juan Carlos,

with Grand Master of the Sovereign Military Order of Malta, [“SMOM”]  Andrew Cardinal Bertie, 2000

((previously noted, Opus Dei’s connection — in origins — with “Carlists”)

Blackwater is more than just a “private army”, much more than just another capitalist war-profiteering business operation.

It is an army operating outside all laws, outside and above the US Constitution ** and yet is controlled by people within and outside our government whose allegiance is primarily to the foreign Vatican state. In other words, Blackwater is a religious army serving the Pope in Rome through the Order of Malta, which is itself considered under international law, as a sovereign entity with special diplomatic powers and privileges.

{{Back to the other link on Blackwater…}}

Like Blackwater, the Order of Malta is “untouchable” because it is at the heart of the elite aristocracy.

Knight of Malta Amschel Mayer Rothschild (1744–1812)

The Knights of Malta is not merely a “charitable organization”.

That’s just an elaborate front, as should become clear to you later. As the name Sovereign Military Order of Malta confirms, it is a military order based on the crusader Knights Hospitaller of Jerusalem and is interwoven with Freemasonry. Most people have never even heard of SMOM, much less that it is a part of Freemasonry. But that is the way the aristocratic elite like it.

One of the symbols of the military orders of the Vatican, the masonic double-headed eagle emblazoned with the Maltese cross, signifies omnipotent royal dominion over both East and West. The orb signifies temporal dominion over the globe of Earth, and the scepter signifies control over the spiritual and religious impulses of humanity.

This eagle symbol is used in the masonic rite of Memphis and Misraim, under which it reads, “Order Out of Chaos”, the Hegelian method of crisis creation. It is found on the seals of many European and Eurasian nation states including that of Russia, indicating direct Vatican control over those countries.

It symbolizes the desire of a predatory elite with virtually unlimited resources, to totally dominate the entire world under a New World Order global government system using secrecy, manipulation, coercion and terror with the ends justifying the means.

Double-Headed Eagle Symbol

The two-headed eagle emblem of the Byzantine Empire (Roman Empire) on a Red Shield was adopted in 1743 by the infamous goldsmith Amschel Moses Bauer.**((link gives a brief history of start of the Rothschild family))  He opened a coin shop in Frankfurt, Germany and hung above his door this Roman eagle on a red shield.

The shop became known as the “Red Shield firm”. The German word for ‘red shield’ is Rothschild. After this point, the Rothschilds became the bankers to kings and pontiffs alike, among the richest families in the world. Ever since, they have financed both sides of every major war and revolution using the Hegelian Dialectic to engineer society toward their New World Order.

Amschel Bauer had a son, Meyer Amschel Bauer. At a very early age Mayer showed that he possessed immense intellectual ability, and his father spent much of his time teaching him everything he could about the money lending business and in the basic dynamics of finance.

A few years after his father’s death in 1755, Mayer went to work in Hannover as a clerk, in a bank, owned by the Oppenheimers. While in the employ of the Oppenheimers, he was introduced to a General von Estorff for whom he ran errands. Meyer’s superior ability was quickly recognized and his advancement within the firm was swift. He was awarded a junior partnership. Von Estorff would later provide the yet-to-be formed House of Rothschild an entré into to the palace of Prince William.His success allowed him the means to return to Frankfurt and to purchase the business his father had established in 1743. The big Red Shield was still displayed over the door. Recognizing the true significance of the Red Shield (his father had adopted it as his emblem from the Red Flag which was the emblem of the revolutionary minded Jews in Eastern Europe), Mayer Amschel Bauer changed his name to Rothschild (red shield). It was at this point that the House of Rothschild came into being. Through his experience with the Oppenheimers, Meyer Rothschild learned that loaning money to governments and kings was much more profitable than loaning to private individuals. Not only were the loans bigger, but they were secured by the nation’s taxes. 

Five Sons, Five Arrows, Five Directions.

Meyer Rothschild had five sons, Amschel, Salomon, Nathan, Karl and Jakob. Meyer spent the rest of his life instructing them all in the secret techniques of money creation and manipulation. As they came of age, he sent them to the major capitals of Europe to open branch offices of the family banking business. Amschel, stayed in Frankfurt, Salomon was sent to Vienna. Nathan was sent to London. Karl went to Naples, and Jakob went to Paris.

Meyer Rothschild began to realize that in order to attain the power necessary to influence and control the finances of the various monarchs in Europe, he would have to wrest this influence and power from the church, which would necessitate its destruction. To accomplish this, he enlisted the help of a Catholic priest, Adam Weishaupt, to assemble a secret Satanic order.

Adam Weishaupt was born February 6, 1748 at Ingoldstadt, Bavaria. Weishaupt, born a Jew, was educated by the Jesuits who converted him to Catholicism. He purportedly developed an intense hatred for the Jesuits. Although he became a Catholic priest, his faith had been shaken by the Jesuits and he became an atheist.

It is believed that, as a result of Voltaire’s writings, Weishaupt formulated his ideas concerning the destruction of the Church. In 1775, when summoned by the House of Rothschild, he immediately defected and, at the behest of Meyer, began to organize the Illuminati. The 1st chapter of the order started in his home town of Ingolstadt.As the name implies, those individuals who are members of the Illuminati possess the ‘Light of Lucifer’. As far as they are concerned, only members of the human race who possess the ‘Light of Lucifer’ are truly enlightened and capable of governing. Denouncing God, Weishaupt and his followers considered themselves to be the cream of the intelligentsia – the only people with the mental capacity, the knowledge, the insight and understanding necessary to govern the world and bring it peace. Their avowed purpose and goal was the establishment of a “Novus Ordo Seclorum” – a New World Order, or One World Government.

Clinton Signs Welfare Bill Amid Division

By Barbara Vobejda
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, August 23 1996; Page A01President Clinton signed historic welfare legislation yesterday that rewrites six decades of social policy, ending the federal guarantee of cash assistance to the poor and turning welfare programs over to the states.

“Today, we are ending welfare as we know it,” Clinton said at a White House ceremony, where he was flanked by three former welfare recipients. “But I hope this day will be remembered not for what it ended, but for what it began.”

Few of humanity rise to the world of reason and consciousness powered by the logic circuits of the computer brain. This highest arena is uniquely human – no other animals have an onboard computer – and the irony is that few humans know how to operate it. They are whizz-kids at using iPhones, but they are clueless about using their own brains properly. They mostly use brains 1 and 2 and rarely trouble brain 3. It lies dormant and dusty in most people, like some never-visited library containing all the knowledge of the cosmos. In fact, many men struggle to use anything more than the crocodile brain. Their minds are preoccupied with fucking, fighting and feasting – like the Vikings.

The computer brain, sadly, does not dominate the lower brains. The limbic system – the seat of the emotions – usually hijacks the higher mental functions i.e. reason is put to the service of the emotions rather than the emotions being in the service of reason. In times of great stress or sexual excitement, the crocodile takes charge of everything and humans become reptiles operating at the basic instinctive level.

With this model of the brain, it becomes easy to see why humanity struggles to reach its potential. {{IS humanity an “it”??}} Most people are stuck at the level of crocodile or horse, and can’t {{or is it WON’T?  Or is it numbed, to the point they don’t sense the need? — which is it?}} raise themselves to the godlike, rational level of the internal supercomputer. The attainment of gnosis** requires the highest brain working at full capacity.

In Jungian terms, the “shadow” is the crocodile brain, the “ego”, “persona” and “anima/animus” are the limbic system and the “Self” is the computer. Reason, not belief, makes us Gods

.

(** I did mention, the site is Gnostic, right?)

Most intellectuals, pseudo and otherwise, deal with the conspiratorial theory of history simply by ignoring it. They never attempt to refute the evidence. It can’t be refuted. If and when the silent treatment doesn’t work, these “objective” scholars and mass media opinion molders resort to personal attacks, ridicule and satire. The personal attacks tend to divert attention from the facts which an author or speaker is trying to expose. The idea is to force the person exposing the conspiracy to stop the exposure and spend his time and effort defending himself.

However, the most effective weapons used against the conspiratorial theory of history are ridicule and satire. These extremely potent weapons can be cleverly used to avoid any honest attempt at refuting the facts. After all, nobody likes to be made fun of. Rather than be ridiculed most people will keep quiet; and, this subject certainly does lend itself to ridicule and satire

Because the Establishment controls the media, anyone exposing the Insiders will be the recipient of a continuous fusillade of invective from newspapers, magazines, TV and radio. In this manner one is threatened with loss of “social respectability” if he dares broach the idea that there is organization behind any of the problems currently wracking America. Unfortunately, for many people social status comes before intellectual honesty. Although they would never admit it social position is more important to many people than is the survival of freedom in America.

If you ask these people which is more important — social respectability or saving their children from slavery — they will tell you the latter, of course. But their actions (or lack of same) speak so much louder than their words. PeopIe have an infinite capacity for rationalization when it comes to refusing to face the threat to America’s survival. Deep down these people are afraid they may be laughed at if they take a stand,. . .

The Insiders know that if the business and professional community will not take a stand to save the private enterprise system, the socialism through which they intend to control the world will be inevitable. They believe that most business and professional men are too shallow and decadent, too status conscious, too tied up in the problems of their jobs and businesses to worry about what is going on in politics. These men are told that it might be bad for business or jeopardize their government contracts if they take a stand. They have been bribed into silence with their own tax monies!

The men at the apex of this movement are not Communists in the traditional sense of that term. They feel no loyalty to Moscow of Peking. They are loyal only to themselves and their undertaking. And these men certainly do not believe in the clap-trap pseudo-philosophy of Communism. They have no intention of dividing their wealth. Socialism is a philosophy which conspirators exploit, but in which only the naive believe. Just how finance capitalism is used as the anvil and Communism as the hammer to conquer the world will be explained in this book.

In addition, the-author has interviewed six men who have spent considerable time as investigators for Congressional committees. In 1953,one of these men, Norman Dodd, headed the Reece Committee’s investigation of tax-free foundations. When Mr. Dodd began delving into the role of international high finance in the world revolutionary movement, the investigation was killed on orders from the Eisenhower occupied White House. According to Mr. Dodd, it is permissable to investigate the radical bomb throwers in the streets, but when you begin to trace their activities back to their origins in the “legitimate world,” the political iron curtain slams down.

Tax-exempt Foundations

Tax-exempt Foundations were originally setup for humanitarian purposes to provide grants to existing institutions. Rene A. Wormser served as General Counsel to the Reece Committee, which was a congressional committee that investigated the Tax-exempt Foundations from 1953 to 1955. His book, Foundations: Their Power and Influence, is a documented expose of his experience with the committee. In it he wrote, “Foundations were originally created to support existing institutions and to undertake certain ‘operating’ functions.”

Soon after (or possibly from their inception) foundations became a loop hole that the financial elite used to avoid taxes. “By the time the income tax became law in 1913, the Rockefeller and Carnegie foundations were already operating. Income tax didn’t soak the rich, it soaked the middle class,” wrote Perloff. “Because it was a graduated tax, it tended to prevent anyone from rising into affluence. Thus it acted to consolidate the wealth of the entrenched interests, and protect them from new competition.”

Smoot pointed out that the primary purpose of some of the large Tax-exempt Foundations is no longer humanitarian in nature, but “predominately tax avoidance.” “One of the leading devices by which the wealthy dodge taxes” concurred Perloff “is the channeling of their fortunes into tax-free foundations.” He also charged that, “The major foundations, though commonly regarded as charitable institutions, often use their grant-making powers to advance the interests of their founders.”

The “independent, uncontrolled financial power often enables foundations to exert a decisive influence on public affairs,” wrote Wormser. He further testified that, “They have a power comparable to political patronage.” He cautioned “When they do harm, it can be immense harm–there is virtually no counterforce to oppose them.”

The report clearly states that the CFR with interlocked foundations have infiltrated the government. And that they use enormous sums of money to propagandize “educate” the public in support of the policies which they decide we should adopt. What congress has told us is that the government has been infiltrated by the CFR using multi-billion-dollar private bank accounts known as Tax-exempt Foundations.

This means that when a major U.S. policy is filtered down from the federal government, into the local and state governments, that it may originate from the CFR/foundation interlock. Specifically, this means that it has come from the big corporations and the international banks, of which the CFR and other Think Tanks are composed.

The “State within a state” that Justice Louis D. Brandeis warned about in 1915, was part of the beginning of a government within a government, or, as FBI Agent Dan Smoot calls it, The Invisible Government. Other notable components include: the emergence of the Federal Reserve System, and the creation and infiltration of the CFR, the Bilderbergers and the TC into the executive branch.

The Reece Committee found that, “When their activities spread into the field of the so-called, ‘social sciences’ or into other areas which our basic moral, social, economic, and governmental principles can be vitally affected, the public should be alerted to these activities and be made aware of the impact of foundation influence on our accepted way of life.”

“The power of the individual large foundations is enormous,” they concluded. “It can exercise various forms of patronage which carry with them elements of thought control. … It is capable of invisible coercion through the power of its purse. … This power to influence national policy is amplified tremendously when foundations act in concert. There is such a concentration of foundation power in the united States.”

Charlotte Iserbyt was the Senior Policy Advisor at the U.S. Department of Education during the 1980s & was trained as a Change Agent to help promote this change. In her book, The Deliberate Dumbing-Down of America, she provides evidence in the form of a timeline, which contains a paper trail dating back to the 1930s, consisting of mainstream news, congressional records, & publications authored by these institutions. Her evidence shows undeniably that the major Tax-exempt Foundations caused a drastic change in the school system, by way of legislation, incredible funding, propaganda, & deception.

Iserbyt stated, “Principals who resisted innovation eventually ended up being forced out of the system undergoing radical change.” “Their trials and tribulations, ” says Iserbyt, “were known only to them, and what they underwent during the change agents’ activities in their schools could be described as inhumane treatment . . .

Iserbyt describes a Change Agent, as, “[a] term used by many people, including President Clinton, leading educators, and social engineers, to identify individuals, highly trained in the group process and in the Delphi Technique.” The Delphi Technique is a method used to manipulate a group, large or small, during a Q&A period so it arrives at a predetermined conclusion. She continues, “These people are designated to bring about controversial change in education, in the operation of our local and state governments, and at the federal and international levels.” After resisters were identified, Change Agents would use other educators who had embraced the new system to pressure them into conforming. Non-conformists were forced out of the industry.

. . .

According to Iserbyt, instead of focusing on conveying knowledge, public education is now mostly about changing a person’s fixed attitudes & beliefs. The new system is based specifically on the works of behaviorists such as Ivan Pavlov & B.F. Skinner. Pavlov & Skinner are best known for their behavior modification tests on rats, pigeons, & dogs. In some cases, communist educators from Russia & China were literally flown into the U.S. to help with the re-structuring.

On August 1, 1977, the Washington Post ran an article entitled, New Curriculum Shifts Teaching Methods in District, stating, “the new curriculum is based on the work in behavioral psychology of Harvard University’s B.F. Skinner who … trained pigeons during World War II to pilot and detonate bombs and torpedoes.”

Transcript of Norman Dodd Interview”

1982 A.D.

with

G. Edward Griffin

Alan Gaither was, at that time, President of the Ford Foundation.  Mr. Gaither had sent for me when I found it convenient to be in New York, asked me to call upon him at his office, which I did.  On arrival, after a few amenities, Mr. Gaither said, “Mr. Dodd, we have asked you to come up here today because we thought that, possibly, off the record, you would tell us why the Congress is interested in the activities of foundations such as ourselves.”

Before I could think of how I would reply to that statement, Mr. Gaither then went on to say, “Mr. Dodd, all of us who have a hand in the making of policies here, have had experience operating under directives, the substance of which is, that we use our grant-making power so as to alter life in the United States that it can be comfortably merged with the Soviet Union.”

Warning!  You are about to enter the Reality Zone — a place were truth is stranger than fiction — where knowledge is king — where myths are shattered and deception exposed.  It is a place where the lessons of history are found, and where true-life adventures reveal the hidden nature of man.

If you proceed, you will not be able to return to the twilight zone from which you came.

You have five seconds remaining to escape.

1 – 2 – 3 – 4 – 5.

Welcome to the Reality Zone.  I am Ed Griffin.  The story we are about to hear represents a missing piece in the puzzle of modern history.  We are about to hear a man tell us that the major tax-exempt foundations of America, since at least 1945, have been operating to promote a hidden agenda.  That agenda has nothing to do with the surface appearance of charity, good works or philanthropy.

This man will tell you that the real objective has been to influence American educational institutions and to control foreign policy agencies of the Federal government.  The purpose of the control has been to condition Americans to accept the creation of world government.  That government is to be based on the principle of collectivism, which is another way of saying socialism;  and, it is to be ruled from behind the scenes by those same interests which control the tax-exempt foundations.

Is this a believable scenario?

Well, the man who tells this story is none other than Mr. Norman Dodd who, in the year 1954, was the staff director of the Congressional Special Committee to investigate tax-exempt foundations — sometimes referred to as the Reece committee, in recognition of its chairman, Congressman Carroll Reece.  I conducted the interview we are about to hear, in 1982.  I had no immediate use for the material at that time, but I realized that Mr. Dodd’s story was of great importance.

Since he was advanced in age and not in good health, I wanted to capture his recollections on videotape while he was still with us.  It was a wise decision, because Mr. Dodd did pass away just a short time afterwards.

In later years there was a resurgence of interest in Mr. Dodd’s story, and we released the videotape to the public in 1991. And so, what now follows is the sound track taken from the full, unedited interview, broken occasionally only for a tape change, or to omit the sound of a passing airplane.  It stands on its own as an important piece in the puzzle of modern history.

[begin interview]

Griffin:  Mr. Dodd, let’s begin this interview by a brief statement, for the record, telling us who you are, what your background is, and your qualifications to speak on the subject.

Dodd:  Well, Mr. Griffin, as for who I am, I am just as the name implies — an individual born in New Jersey and educated in private schools, eventually in a school called Andover, Massachusetts, and then Yale University.

And, running through my whole period of being brought up, growing up, I have been an emphaticable [sic] reader, and I have had one major interest and that was this country, as I was led to believe that it was originally founded.

I entered the world of business knowing absolutely nothing about how that world operated.  And, I realized that the only way to find out what that world was, and consisted of, would be to become part of it.  And I then acquired some experience in the manufacturing world, and in the world of international communications, and finally chose banking as the field I wished to devote my life to.

I was fortunate enough, to secure a position in one of the important banks in New York.  I lived there.  I lived through the conditions which led up to what is known as the crash of 1929.  I witnessed what is tantamount to a collapse of the structure of the United States as a whole.

Much to my surprise, my superiors, in the middle of the panic in which they were immersed, confronted me.  I was confronted with the question, “Norm, what do we do now?”

I was thirty at the time, and I had no more right to have an answer to that question than the man in the moon.  However, I did manage to say to my superiors, “Gentlemen, you take this experience as proof of something that you do not know about banking.”  And you better go find out what that something is, and act accordingly.

Four days later, I was confronted by these same superiors, with a statement to the effect that, “Norm, you go find out.”  And I really was fool enough to accept that assignment, because it meant that you were going out to search for something, and nobody could tell you what you were looking for.  I felt so strongly on the subject that I consented to it.

I was relieved of all normal duties inside the bank and, two and a half years later, I felt that it was possible to report back to those who had given me this assignment.  So, I rendered such a report and, as a result of the report I rendered, I was told the following:  “Norm, what you are saying is, we should return to sound banking.”  And I said, “Yes, in essence, that’s exactly what it is that I am saying.”

Whereupon, I got my first shock, which was a statement from them to this effect:  “We will never see sound banking in the United States again.”  And they cited chapter and verse, to support that statement.

What they cited was as follows:  since the end of WWI, we have been responsible for what they call the institutionalizing of conflicting interests.  And they are so prevalent inside this country, that they can never be resolved.

This came to me as an extraordinary shock because the men who made this statement were men who were deemed as the most prominent bankers in the country.  The bank of which I was a part was spoken of a Morgan bank.  Coming from men of that caliber, a statement of that kind made a tremendous impression on me.

But, they had to have something in the way of a rationalization of their decision to do everything they could to stop completion of this investigation, given the direction that it was moving.  That direction would have been exposure of this Carnegie Endowment story, and the Ford Foundation, and the Guggenheim, and the Rockefeller Foundation — all working in harmony toward the control of education in the United States.

 {{HOW the investigation was stopped]]

Well, to secure the help of the White House in the picture, they got the White House to cause the liaison between the White and the Hill — a major person — to go up to Hayes and try to get him, as it were, actively to oppose what the investigation was engaged in.

Hayes, then, very kindly, would listen to this visit from this major person.  Then he would call me and say, “Norm, come up to my office.  I have a good deal to tell you.”

I would go up.  He would tell me he just had a visit from this major person, and he wants me to break up this investigation. So then I said, “Wayne, what did you do?  What did you say to him?”  He said, “I just told him to get the hell out.”  And he did that three times.  I got pretty proud of him, in the sense that he was, as it were, backing me up.  We finally embarked upon hearings at Hayes’ request.  Hayes wanted to get them out of the way, before he went abroad in the summer.

Griffin:  Why were the hearings finally terminated?  What happened to the Committee?

Dodd:  What happened to the Committee, or to the hearings?

Griffin:  The hearings.

Dodd:  The hearings were terminated.  Carroll Reece was up against such a furor in Hayes, through the activity of our own Counsel. Hayes became convinced that he was being double-crossed;  and he put on a show in the public hearing room, Mr. Griffin, that was an absolute disgrace.  He called Carroll Reece publicly every name in the book.

Mr. Reece took this as proof that he couldn’t continue the hearings.  He actually invited me to accompany him when he went down to Hayes’ office and, in my presence, with the tears rolling down his face, Hayes apologized to Carroll Reece for all he’d done, and his conduct.  He apologized to me.  I thought that would be enough, and Carroll would resume.  He never did.

. . . .

Off she went –{{his staff person, an attorney, to read over notes of board minutes of a tax-exempt foundation}}  to New York.  She came back at the end of two weeks, with the following recorded on dictaphone belts.

We are now at the year nineteen hundred and eight, which was the year that the Carnegie Foundation began operations.  And, in that year, the trustees meeting, for the first time, raised a specific question, which they discussed throughout the balance of the year, in a very learned fashion.  And the question is this:  Is there any means known more effective than war, assuming you wish to alter the life of an entire people?  And they conclude that, no more effective means to that end is known to humanity, than war.  So then, in 1909, they raise the second question, and discuss it, namely, how do we involve the United States in a war?

Well, I doubt, at that time, if there was any subject more removed from the thinking of most of the People of this country, than its involvement in a war.  There were intermittent shows in the Balkans, but I doubt very much if many people even knew where the Balkans were.  And finally, they answer that question as follows:  we must control the State Department.

And then, that very naturally raises the question of how do we do that?  They answer it by saying, we must take over and control the diplomatic machinery of this country and, finally, they resolve to aim at that as an objective.  Then, time passes, and we are eventually in a war, which would be World War I.  At that time, they record on their minutes a shocking report in which they dispatch to President Wilson a telegram cautioning him to see that the war does not end too quickly.  And finally, of course, the war is over.

At that time, their interest shifts over to preventing what they call a reversion of life in the United States to what it was prior to 1914, when World War I broke out.  At that point, they come to the conclusion that, to prevent a reversion, we must control education in the United States.  And they realize that is a pretty big task.  To them it is too big for them alone.

So they approach the Rockefeller Foundation with a suggestion:  that portion of education which could be considered domestic should be handled by the Rockefeller Foundation, and that portion which is international should be handled by the Endowment.

They then decide that the key to the success of these two operations lay in the alteration of the teaching of American History.  So, they approach four of the then most prominent teachers of American History in the country — people like Charles and Mary Byrd.  Their suggestion to them is this, “Will they alter the manner in which they present their subject””  And, they get turned down, flatly.

So, they then decide that it is necessary for them to do as they say, i.e. “build our own stable of historians.”  Then, they approach the Guggenheim Foundation, which specializes in fellowships, and say”  “When we find young men in the process of studying for doctorates in the field of American History, and we feel that they are the right caliber, will you grant them fellowships on our say so?  And the answer is, “Yes.”

So, under that condition, eventually they assemble twenty (20), and they take these twenty potential teachers of American History to London.  There, they are briefed in what is expected of them — when, as, and if they secure appointments in keeping with the doctorates they will have earned.

That group of twenty historians ultimately becomes the nucleus of the American Historical Association.  And then, toward the end of the 1920’s, the Endowment grants to the American Historical Association four hundred thousand dollars ($400,000) for a study of our history in a manner which points to what this country look forward to, in the future.

That culminates in a seven-volume study, the last volume of which is, of course, in essence, a summary of the contents of the other six.  The essence of the last volume is this:  the future of this country belongs to collectivism, administered with characteristic American efficiency.

That is the story that ultimately grew out of, and of course, was what could have been presented by the members of, this Congressional Committee, and the Congress as a whole, for just exactly what it said.  But, they never got to that point!

The Road to Serfdom is a book written by the Austrian-born economist and philosopherFriedrich von Hayek(1899–1992) between 1940–1943, in which he “warned of the danger of tyranny that inevitably results from government control of economic decision-making through central planning,”^[1] and in which he argues that the abandonment of individualism, classical liberalism, and freedom inevitably leads to socialist or fascist oppression and tyranny and the serfdom of the individual. Significantly, Hayek challenged the general view among British academics that fascism was a capitalist reaction against socialism, instead arguing that fascism and socialism had common roots in central economic planning and the power of the state over the individual.

The Road to Serfdom is among the most influential and popular expositions of market libertarianism and remains a popular and influential work in contemporary discourse, selling over two million copies, and remaining a best-seller.^[2][3]

The Road to Serfdom was to be the popular edition of the second volume of Hayek’s treatise entitled “The Abuse and Decline of Reason,”^[4] and the title was inspired by the writings of the 19th century French classical liberal thinker Alexis de Tocqueville on the “road to servitude.”^[5] The book was first published in Britain by Routledge in March 1944, during World War II, and was quite popular, leading Hayek to call it “that unobtainable book,” also due in part to wartime paper rationing.^[6] It was published in the United States by the University of Chicago Pressin September 1944 and achieved great popularity. At the arrangement of editor Max Eastman, the American magazine Reader’s Digest published an abridged version in April 1945, enabling The Road to Serfdom to reach a wider popular audience beyond academics.

The Road to Serfdom has had a significant impact on twentieth century conservative and libertarian economic and political discourse and is often cited today by commentators.

HOW TO PROTEST?

FOURTEEN SIGNPOSTS TO SLAVERY

1. Restrictions on taking money out of the country and on the establishment or retention of a foreign bank account by an American citizen.

2. Abolition of private ownership of hand guns.

3. Detention of individuals without judicial process.

4. Requirements that private financial transactions be keyed to social security numbers or other government identification so that government records of these transactions can be kept and fed into a computer.

5. Use of compulsory education laws to forbid attendance at presently existing private schools.***

(*** but notice which schools some of our government leaders, and their children, attend!)

6. Compulsory non-military service.

7. Compulsory psychological treatment for non-government workers or public school children.

8. An official declaration that anti-Communist organizations are subversive and subsequent legal action taken to suppress them.

9. Laws limiting the number of people allowed to meet in a private home.

10. Any significant change in passport regulations to make passports more difficult to obtain or use.

11. Wage and price controls, especially in a non-wartime situation

12. Any kind of compulsory registration with the government of where individuals work.**

(**welfare roles document this — the poor are subject to even more invasion than others…)

13. Any attempt to restrict freedom of movement within the United States.

14. Any attempt to make a new major law by executive decree (that is, actually put into effect, not merely authorized as by existing executive orders.)

As you are n6 doubt aware President Nixon already has invoked numbers 1, 14 and 14.

Steps 2, 3, 6, 7, 9, 12 and 13 already have been proposed and some are actively campaigned for by organized groups. As of January 1, 1972 banks must report to the government any deposit or withdrawal over $5,000.The next step will be to restrict the taking of money out of the country. Big Brother is watching your bank account!

Increased government control over many kinds of private schools is proposed annually in many state legislatures.