Identify the Entities, Find the Funding, Talk Sense!
How USA Has Standardized, Professionalized and Privatized the Basic Response to Domestic Violence, with Built-in Biases and Strategically Chosen Blind Spots (Quick by-Recall Summary, Publ. Apr. 19, 2022).
My sentiments (opinions) regarding USA’s] … Basic Response to Domestic Violence, with Built-in Biases and Strategically Chosen Blind Spots, take a while to express. So did my expressing how the post is organized. Enjoy the ride; there’s content and entertainment (at least my brand), and I trust more insight into current events (in this field) throughout whether preview, intro, or “basic quick summary.” As a blog, it’s still informal in structure, not a book with chapters …//LGH
~~ Quick post preview before I publish this today, April 19. Well, maybe not that quick…~~
This post’s two middle sections deal with the HiAP topic (how the entire topic of violence and abuse is framed, internationally and with intent that nations should make sure to get in line with this approach) and — only because the current arrangements USA, and as the domestic/family violence prevention field (notice I’m not saying “and child abuse” in that phrase) resemble in character and operations the same organizing and multi-layered, multi-sector, multi-jurisdiction arrangements that — until it collapsed and was shut down — were found from the 1970s until the early 1990s at the Bank of Credit and Commerce International (“BCCI”). I found and added a few BCCI-summaries, but, people, this is NOT off-topic!
After those two sections, and moving towards the final summary, an extended set of paragraphs and some images/quotes regarding Lundy Bancroft (NOT my original focus in this post) made their entrance, and the bottom section is recognizable by its color. In fact, this is how it starts:
My Basic Summary, Impromptu, By Recall (from the years of looking this up…)
For example, within the domestic violence (prevention and services) field, USA, it’s already been strategized and organized into statewide coalitions (primarily government-funded) with member organizations in each state (and/or territory), ALL tax-exempt and the delegated (and by law, better funded, from the US government at least), “Domestic Violence Resource Network” (on Twitter, I use “#DVRN”), itself a combination of entities and non-entities. The DVRN provides the main theory and information to distribute; the statewide coalitions provide feedback and control operations within each state (via membership status for pass-through grants, typically small).
Several parts of this approach are unfair and lack transparency. Some experts in particular, being more prominent and adept at self-promotion (in addition to positions of prestige to start with), have done irretrievable damage with obsession with behavioral modification (training perps, training judges, training everyone within reach), that is with not handling “domestic violence” as a criminal matter involving attacks upon individual persons, as opposed to establishing and building capacity of a privately run, public-funded (mostly) system-of-change enterprise, with favored “warriors” and specific battle-cries featured and the overall truth — about the economic motivations, conflicts of interest with the public interest — often buried, no matter how many non-brainwashed survivors report it openly, usually individually, and usually without support of mainstream journals or advocacy (tax-exempt organization) groups compliant with the overall “privatization” schema.
Most of us “lone wolf bloggers” regardless of what we’ve researched, said, or know don’t have the public relations “pull” which is, bottom line, also connections to media, and access to the finances.
Moreover, if we don’t play up the “survivor” element in the right way, with the right demeanor and appropriately loyalty to the infrastructure — this includes keeping BIG secrets — we typically don’t have the stable employment, many do not have the pertinent advanced degrees (i.e., lawyers, psych, sociologist, etc.) common to the Family Court Reformists, regardless of what many may have had before the Family Court Fiasco experience involving (typically) years of litigation, broke or funded — the litigation continues…
We face paywalls regularly (journal subscriptions), no way to write off airfare, globetrotting consults or conferences (pre-pandemic or after), and, some having become also fugitives (for lack of the safety they/we didn’t get through normal legal protections or interventions), are often not even in the same public location, and not prone to divulging widely where we now live. “It’s complicated.” This leaves advocacy by the publicity-seekers but NOT personal long-term family court or domestic violence/child abuse issues — how many are even married or parents, or if so have gone through divorces post-welfare reform USA (1990s) or in this century, (CAFCASS was formed in 2001, right?) I often wonder — a wider-open field.
(Health In All Policies, CDC.gov descriptn, web page dated 2016. I’ve blogged. Zoom in on the graphic (circle content). Notice named nonprofits (links within the text) named. See the whole page for more, esp. NACCHO. / Screen shot Apr. 17, 2022
Throughout development, consistent attempts to frame it as (and funded under) public health (and as a major opportunity for further social science research and studies) continued.
Look up (although many sites are now “archived”) “Health in All Policies” as an international policy agenda. I was blogging it I see in October-November, 2017 (Search HiAP on this blog). This framework facilitates non-governmental NGOs setting policies regionally and globally,, to be adopted by countries and subnational (to countries) governments, and has boasted about its expertise in doing so.
In 2017, I had not yet fled California (but would within the year, in 2018). It seems I had more time to research and write in depth. In a series of posts, I challenged those discussing of “global citizenship” to admit (based on basic word definitions) by definition, if there is global citizenship, there must be a “global sovereign” because citizenship relates to sovereignty (Documented from reputable sources, i.e., Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, among others).
Therefore the constant use to “global citizenship” (often at universities) as leading to world peace by diminishing the role with a view to diminishing or maintaining only the shells of territory-based nation-states, is an oxymoron. It’s a logical fallacy, but in this utopian world view “sovereignty” (basic meaning, dominance, rulership, independence for superior authority, self-agency, etc.) is “bad” because it leads to conflict. This worldview hasn’t been thought through (or, openly discussed) very well — if you want citizenship (global or otherwise) you’re asking for a sovereign — a ruling body that subdues and dominates others. If you want that citizenship to be “global” that’s asking for a global dominator or dominatrix sovereign; that’s simply expanding the scope of oppression for the sake of the state. It’s just a much larger state.
I say having some undefined set of global sovereign beyond the reach of ordinary (or even basic citizens of subsidiary nations) is a bad thing, not a good thing — and I see that based in part on how I came to understand that, within the USA, my STATE laws regulated at the COUNTY level (district attorneys, family courts, etc.) was influenced by the FEDERAL policy (welfare reform favoring one gender over the others, and typically, where there’s been a more abusive parent, switching custody to that one and then letting the less abusive one keep coming back to court to re-gain contact, thereby leading to court resources being stressed out — which legitimizes (rationalizes) more streamlining/expediting/out-sourcing of the basic judicial process into private hands. It simply creates more layers of administration, and more private parties, individuals must deal with, and the public must pay for.
In miniature, this is also how the “domestic violence” and “family violence” fields also run. Global seems to always prevail over domestic (USA) where there’s a conflict, and national over federal (USA) when there’s any conflict (of jurisdictions). This erodes representation where it matters the most – where we actually live.
So below here, I’ve listed several (four, currently) posts I wrote in 2017 featuring the “HiAP” policy and at least one of them also mentions, as I recall the BCCI (Bank of Credit and Commerce International, which for about twenty years ran a major criminal operation by skillfully dodging accountability through operations in many jurisdictions, and under many styles of corporations, and etc. It was criminal, and finally first, the Bank of England, then the USA, shut it down (although some individuals were prosecuted in Florida, before that). It’s a story ALL of us should be aware of for what it shows about how criminal activity can be and was set up, impacting both investors overseas, and those in the USA.
Right now, you may not feel or sense the pressure, but, having followed so many of the advocacy groups (DV, Fatherhood, and “protective parents” cause-based groups) for, literally, about twenty years (some review of origins and filings was necessary once I started blogging in 2009), I am aware of the intense pressure to conform USA practices to the UK/Commonwealth ones in these fields, and how specific individuals, literally, “front” for the curricula to be run in many jurisdictions. Problems that arise in the USA specifically because the philosophy behind “family courts” (primary focus on behavioral health, not individual rights, plus “collectivist” mentality) is foreign to this country — causing major conflict and sense of betrayal by those who believed we still had some rights left — are then, from the UK perspective (I have specific, recent examples in mind), are characterized as “we don’t want USA’s problems coming over here…” — especially when some focus on “parental alienation” and as a result get to continue blaming “Richard Gardner,” who happened to be American. As though there weren’t private judicial membership associations, or the small but vocal “association of family and conciliation courts” and as though people in those continue to form more nonprofits to run programming (i.e., “non-profit means, can accept contributions, and doesn’t have to pay the basic income taxes individuals do).
etc.
I just searched HiAP on this blog, and saw three main posts (links, and dates below). None is a simple read, but all raise good points which my own life had forced me to consider as well.
For the middle one (with reference to Chatham House Rule), I’d looked at a global business development enterprise (?) “ABSIS” (or similar name) which cited application of that rule to its own meetings. The question of who, really, is running this place (and this world) — including but not limited to how issues such as domestic violence — are framed and dealt with — is always one to be aware of, and seek answers to, maintain awareness of where changes in regime(s) are occurring, and by which means.
I’ve been saying throughout this blog, as far as I can remember, that this means entails privatization of government services and expansion of government itself (via delegating, outsourcing, and providingh grants/contracts) major social engineering NOT that different from colonialism (and with it, implicit, is slavery). Parallel to this outsourcing of specialized subject matter into (outstretched to receive it) private control are increasing layers of bureaucracy at the executive branch of governments (federal and state both) of leadership, which further embeds any responses developed, for example, decades ago, into systems which have since then undergone major changes. The executive branch seems to be getting larger and more complex with every year, when not being “consolidated” in its parts (but, still under the Executive Branch of government, state and federal).
Trying to reframe, and repackage such an apparatus as somehow intending towards altruism, equity or justice when the global goals (check any version at the UN level), JUSTICE is rarely near the top of any list is ludicrous. But, by claiming “health” is (as in, consider: “healthy relationships” “Healthy Marriage” “Responsible fatherhood”), it seems “anything goes” and can be instituted in violation, or simply bypassing (that’s why I said “circumscribing” in one of the title below), basic civil rights. These are four of my “HiaP posts,” which I summarized above, after a quick review.
Oct. 24, 2017 | Short-link ends “-7LY”HiaP (HEALTH not LAW) in all Policies,Coordinated from Afar, Applied Locally, including throughout the USA
Oct. 26, 2017 | Short-link ends “-7QH” (“Health as an Asset” “Thought Leadership” and the Chatham House Rule:** A Section Unearthed from My “Smoking Control/Tobacco Litigation” Post and Reposted Here, in light of Current Congressional Events,…”)
Nov. 24, 2017 | Short-link ends “-7MB” (Changing (the) World, Changing (the) Words: Sovereignty, Circumscribing Sovereignty versus Global ‘Citizenship’ (the Unmentionable: then who is the Global ‘Sovereign’?). References.)
Nov. 5, 2017 | Short-link ends “-7N2” Before WHO’s HiAP there was UN’s Agenda 21; As Usual, Internationally-Networked Nonprofits such as ICLEI-Local Governments for Sustainability USA, Inc.** ~ (1991ff, MA legal domicile; first HQ in Boston, then Berkeley, then Oakland, and lately Denver) ~ Help Spread the Latest Version of the Global Gospel. (post started 10/14/2017 as one of two spin-off posts from my “HiAP” one)
Screen shot of the top of one of the posts:
Here’s a list of tabs (one image) from just one of the posts:
And this next long quote (from the Nov. 5 post, short-link ends “-7N2“) which deals with both the nonprofit mentioned (ICLEI – Local Governments for Sustainability, USA), the need to do drill-downs, and a critique of the type of journalism which doesn’t encourage readers to do either of those activities. In other words, I take on not just international nonprofits mimicking government operations (as organized, in this case, from Canada towards the USA), with leadership getting outrageous salaries for managing investments of (public pensions, public assets, for example) — like $4.4M, $1.1M, and others — all under a tax exempt entity which might, for example, included four “disregarded entity” LLCs — and call it all “for public benefit” — but also media, including the New York Times, and who (at that time) controlled it.
I’m resisting the temptation to include more screenshots from my 2017 work, but here’s some text copied from it. I don’t remember all the details, but I certainly remember doing the posts (over four years ago), which is a benefit doing one’s own look-ups (research) and writing it up: more things tend to be retained in memory and in their contexts:
[regarding this type of reporting, and regarding issues or organizations of interest or concern, i.e., on reading standard journalism of this type] of dwelling or speculating too long WITHOUT coming to solid evidence or conclusions on matters (such as these) reported.
I took the time for some analysis of this article up through its introduction of “ICLEI” not just for that specific content, but also for the principles / reporting practices it demonstrates, sad (this time) to say.
The practices found in the article recur throughout journalism, on well-respected and not-so-well -respected publications (print and digital). I believe it’s easier to catch and discuss as found in written format (including digital) than in videos in motion which must be freeze-framed, power-pointed or otherwise social/presentation-media-processed to discuss or analyze.
Meanwhile, mainstream and other media, has been and will continue consolidating into conglomerates and selling off the less profitable parts, to maximize profits, and the prior owners will often with their profits form philanthropies or more private foundations for good PR and political activism.** ## They will be de-emphasizing print, and increasingly focusing on dynamic audience + business interactions and feedback, and ways to “amplify” individual pieces across media, and in general are up-front about this.
(I added emphases for the quote, not on original. The post is a detailed drill-down…)
One place to start looking at Health in All Policies: https://www.cdc.gov/policy/hiap/index.html While it’s fuzzy, notice the image has seven titles around the outer layer, of which “Injury and violence” prevention (top left) is just one.
I have lived through 30 years of this history (the first 10 of that, as a battered mother in a married home — federally approved stable institution for the benefit of society) while my own work and social support connections were increasingly and repeatedly “trimmed” so as to become dependent to my (abusive) spouse. Through him and through experiencing what happened every time I transgressed some unwritten boundary (the ultimate boundary was control by the person — not by any code of right or wrong, and certainly not, in that married context, by what was legal or illegal conduct towards other human beings (adult or child), I learned at least every tactic, and had identified most of them as such a tactic, well before Evan Stark or Lundy Bancroft published their books on “Coercive Control” or “Why Does He Do That?” which (as to the latter, is the wrong question to ask — how to get inside the heads of violent men, and let a career psychologist, consultant translate for both men and women alike).
Last I heard, it seems Bancroft tried to start a new age religion of “healing circles” (Peak Living Network (Principles) | Readings & Resources) while working the Christian “abuse response” circuit, but got called out a few times by the latter for promoting the new age spirituality (i.e., trying basically to start a new religion, which he’d lead, and has written the scripts (trainings) for).
He also works the protective mothers** circles AND the fatherhood grantee consults simultaneously (I’ve blogged), yet somehow the only safe place for survivors to be heard is if they speak the same message, same rhetoric, and quote chosen experts, recruit others of their own kind (i.e., those who’ve been abused), and maybe publish their stories and do conferences to promote (1) their books of survival and (2) shrink-wrapped (pre-formed) solutions in how to push for more training for judges (and others).
Here is a presentation at UCIrvine, April 5, 2019: The Medical and Legal Need to Protect Survivors and Children in Family Courts (This was a Law.UCI.Edu event: University of California, Irvine, co-sponsored by the Orange County Family Violence Council (which I looked for but so far couldn’t find) and Wings For Justice: Keynote Speaker, Bancroft; subsidiary speakers, a UCI professor and Survivor (noncustodial) Mom, Wendi Miller). See image for more details: I’ve only quoted the bottom half of this event; image doesn’t display the whole page, only the top part…)
Dr. Sandra Murray
Clinical Professor, UCI School of Medicine
Medical Impact of Domestic Violence on Children
Wendi Miller
CEO, Wings for Justice
The Need for Advocacy to Protect Children in Family Court
The conference will conclude with a dramatic reading of the play Forbidden to Protect, co-authored by Lundy Bancroft and Patrice Lenowitz, about battered women’s experiences with the child custody system.
This event is approved for 4 hours of Minimum Continuing Legal Education Credit by the State Bar of California. UCI School of Law is a State Bar-approved MCLE provider.
Featuring (top billing) Lundy Bancroft as “Family Issues Specialist” and alongside him, Wendi Miller, of nonprofit “Wings for Justice” (W4J) which had only been formed in 2016. W4J came to my attention on Twitter, after which I looked it up (it being a California entity), wondered why its filings were so delinquent, and only in the “details” pages read that its CEO, Wendi Miller, had been murdered (!). She can still be heard on YouTube and adamantly reciting “58,000 children a year” statistic after introduced by Bancroft. Since then, I read (much) more about their case (she lost custody) and have heard (on-line) from another who was present in California at this meeting. The event was only $15.00 and it seems some CE (Continuing Education) units may have applied to those who attended.
Within about just two weeks (and on Easter weekend), she was found murdered in an apartment in Newport Beach, with a man Darren Partch she’d picked up and driven home with late Saturday night. It was a double-homicide, discovered a day later (4/21/2019). This doesn’t seem to be a custody-related, or “DV” situation; an arrest was made quickly (and some say, possibly, of the wrong guy), while the celebrations of her life continued: “Overflow crowd mourns women found slain in Newport Beach” (May 3, 2019, in the L.A. Times). Her children were living with their father (a pastor, since remarried) in Colorado.
But shortly before Wendi Miller was murdered, yet another plug by Lundy for some work with Patrice Lenowitz (in New Jersey) (also a survivor), who has for years teamed up with, helped promote his work, and (judging by the website) promoting any group he, Barry Goldstein, or the BMCC promotes.
Whether or not she (Lenowitz) makes a living at this, or anything close to his reputation, is dubious, but the pattern is pretty clear: Lundy Bancroft (and Barry Goldstein) seek out traumatized women, survivors and USE them and their stories to promote their own (Bancroft, Goldstein) reputations, consultancies, expert witness testimony, BOOKS, even (now) a novel (Bancroft), a play, a webinar featuring one of this earlier books (See NurturedParent.org) and to set in place peer groups for “healing” to advertise more of the same, i.e., networking. What does Patrice get out of this? The reward of supporting a (supposedly) empathetic, male whose speech resonates with concern — while promoting to protect children IN the family court system … decade after decade…. (Patrice Lenowitz Narrative Bio)
NurturedParent.org viewed April, 2022.
NurturedParent.org viewed April, 2022.
The website for Nurtured Parent is barely there; it lists the usual cast of characters (see website) and, seems to be hoping or asking for contributors (architects and philanthropists) to help set up a Zen Center for healing of all kinds — not just for domestic violence survivors.
More “Bancroft”**(April 2016 Facebook, Bancroft saying, If you’d like to meet me in person, come to the 12th Annual Battered Mothers’ Custody Conference” (and promoting his work, and Patrice Lenowitz’s). California Protective Parents Association on Twitter, (Nov. 2021), featuring (RT) a Lundy Bancroft statement about the Family Courts being a virtual slave trade (a short essay with a few links and a few photos), after which he promotes his new book, “In Custody” — a novel… Bancroft’s Twitter handle is “LundyBancroftSays” (found at @LundyBancroftQuote); it’s not that active, but the pinned Tweet promotes his book; another one (shown) promotes “Protective Mothers Alliance” (A wordpress site) promoting his Twitter account…) He’s relentless (and completely without shame) in the self-promotion… Look at the hashtags: (At the bottom, the link to “UnStoppableMothers” is a Twitter account run by ProtectiveMothersAlliance (which has a blog, a facebook, a Twitter account (as “UnStoppable Mothers” for one of its projects), a BlogTalk Radio show (saying openly, PMA is co-directed by Lundy Bancroft & Janice Levinson), but so far as I ever heard, PMA never incorporated… These Tweets are not that recent, but they are still inbred…. (copied just today, 18 April 2022):
Entitlement is the abuser’s belief that he has a special status and that it provides him with exclusive rights and privileges that do not apply to his partner
More images from some of the descriptions above (all relate to Bancroft, all but the first one from Twitter Screenshots). Lundy Bancroft was not the original focus of this post, but what I say and show here still applies to the opportunism throughout the field… :
Peak Living Network Training Courses (Bancroft)
@LBancroftQuotes promoting PMA (who promotes him in return | see hashtags).
@LBancroftQuotes | moderately active account, but you can see the focus: Himself and his words…
@CaProParents (CPPA) promoting (for free?) LundyBancroft.com, colorfully. The site promoted goes on for a few paragraphs and ends with a plug for his recent novel. From Nov. 2021.
So after writing my “Basic Summary, Impromptu, by Recall — but from years of looking this up” (and informed by personal experiences, both my own and others I hear of in personal conversations with, typically but not always, Moms sick and tired of watching the continued “technical assistance and training” and “holistic responses” which translate into No Direct Help For You, Your Children (now grown), or Next Generations — I had to take a little mental time-out, and remove this information from where I’d begun to express the situation.
I don’t plan to develop this post the way I do many. It’s a basic recitation of information I’ve blogged (and/or investigated in the usual manner ways accessible to anyone with access to an internet and some attention to detail, who looks for registered entities, and has a basic awareness of which domestic violence organizations (USA, in particular) exist, and how and when these were set up. Other posts with more detail have preceded, and may (by the grace of God, I should say) follow.
I just took a closer look at where New York State’s “OPDV” exists (as to its website). It took many looks to register — because it’s not displayed that openly on the websites — that this exists UNDER the “Office of Children and Family Services” within the state. How ironic that on the state level, especially under prior Governor Andrew Cuomo and current (his replacement when he had to resign in summer 2021…) Governor Kathy Hochul, we are looking pretty much as straightforward progressive platforms and language. I expect this –after all, it’s New York, right?
But the OCFS is anything but “progressive” when it comes to the topic of mothers and children vis a vis fathers and their families. OCFS is running marriage and fatherhood programming through its Flexible Funding for Family Services program. Tricky …. but hardly progressive. I’ll say this again: with (many varieties of) “Republican,” women know approximately what they’ll be getting — conservative values, not particularly fond of separate but equal (genders) — separate yes; equal no… and a strong faith-based contingent which has made a religion of male domination, and demonizing (and finding ever new ways to restrain and punish) independent women — except those already in power with a lot of money or prestige to add to the board of directors of some nonprofit.
What we forget is that progressivism also includes Catholicism, when it comes to the gender issues. It’s possible to both worship the Mother of God and oppress mothers of one’s own children, while (at the political level, no particular exception for Congress, Legislators, or even Presidents), philandering, cheating, adultery, and covering it up is “no big deal.” It was within the Clinton, Biden, Gingrich and predecessor family lines. I’m no Presidential historian, not commenting on the Obamas, and the Bush family records, well …. which of them upholds the standards that we’re lectured to, especially if “low-income” families? ANY of ’em?
So Clinton (in 1996 Welfare Reform), as coached by Dick Morris (formerly a Republican consultant, probably one again since both Rhodes Scholars) figured out common areas of concern by male-dominated Democrats AND Republicans, and how to target single mothers as the social scourge, based on social science and demographics.
I can say “How the USA Has…” because there are timelines for both the featured experts (often but not always academics) and the various nonprofits set up to run programming, nonprofits taking federal funds via state pass-through funding (and sometimes directly), interacting as a quasi-“safety net.”
Intended a brief summary for another post — and as moved here, it’s still brief (with the information above, still under three six thousand words): Year after year, we see those who’ve made their professions within “domestic violence response” have maintained: steady employment with high salaries and pensions, sometimes even tenure; retirement consulting opportunities, publication privileges, global reputations to go with the boost from having “pioneered” a coordinated strategy (in certain ways, and strategically NOT in other certain ways), and stuck the public with most of the bill, as these programs are run and funded by government.
This cannot be said for all the people running the statewide “Coalitions Against Domestic Violence” (often women though not always, and with some exceptions, often NOT paid that much…).
As organized this maintains the caste system across the U.S. (and exported to some places it was originally imported from, so it seems) when it comes to problem-solving and, basically, participation in representative government.
The domestic violence “coordinated community response” apparatus reminds me in many ways the criminal enterprise “BCCI” (I blogged in my posts on Arkansas; it came up in that context).– who, really, is going to hold any of the organizations or individuals accountable at the local level, and who has the reach to reach out to other countries about how it goes “locally” (meaning for me, in the United States).
NOTE TO READERS: I’ve had this section on BCCI here, several quotes, up for just a day or so. I’m going to leave the links but remove the extended quote to a new post more focused on that topic, which will be published by the end of today. The section moved includes several quotes and lead-in, transition texts… It should shorten this post by about another 3,000 words…//LGH 20 April, 2022.
The BCCI example raises important issues which (says this article, and I tend to agree) seem to have been forgotten.
By Casey Michel, an investigative journalist and author of American Kleptocracy: How the U.S. Created the World’s Greatest Money Laundering Scheme in History, and Ricardo Soares de Oliveira
One bank, above all others, highlights the modern realities of transnational corruption and how authoritarian governments abroad can sink their tendrils into Western governments. Overseen by autocratic oligarchs abroad, this bank used everything including shell companies, fake foundations, and anonymous real estate purchases to launder billions and billions of dollars.
More than 12 years ago, a major U.S. bank decided not to do any business with a Luxembourg-based institution called the Bank of Credit and Commerce International.
One of the American executives recalls that something about BCCI just didn’t add up. “They were reluctant to provide information about the sources and uses of funds,” he said last week. “We got bad vibes from them … so we just put them on our internal blacklist.”
A lot of other people got bad vibes from BCCI, and among bankers it acquired the nickname of “Bank of Crooks and Criminals.” But it took a dozen years for regulators overseeing BCCI’s far-flung empire in Britain, Luxembourg, the Cayman Islands and elsewhere to reach the same conclusion. // In the interim, BCCI wove what its auditors, Price Waterhouse, belatedly discovered and now describe as “probably one of the most complex deceptions in banking history.”
BCCI made phony loans, concealed deposits, hid huge losses, and was the bank for a host of shady customers ranging from terrorists and spies to drug runners and dictators. //
THIS one is follow-up, claims by the Liquidators that the British banking system failed to regulate. It includes an interesting history; black & white, no images. The Bank of England is being sued… the total value of the case (at the time) was to be, USD $1.5 billion or British Pounds 850 million.
By the way, the “iii” in “iiiGlobal” stands for “International Insolvency Institute.” It’s a nonprofit showing a Virginia, USA location; check out its mission statement… And read (the obituary, unfortunately) about its founder, E. Bruce Leonard (1944-2017), prominent insolvency lawyer, and lead agent in the Canadian restructuring for General Motors and Chrysler, who saw a need for cross-border coordination of insolvency cases. You can see how the BCCI situation would be within its interest area…
BANK OF CREDIT AND COMMERCE INTERNATIONAL SA V BANK OF ENGLAND CHRISTOPHER GRIERSON, LOVELLS, LONDON
INTRODUCTION/CASE OVERVIEW
The Liquidators of BCCI SA are suing the Bank of England (“the Bank”) on behalf of approximately 6,500 depositors who have assigned their claims to the Liquidators for the purposes of the proceedings. The proceedings were commenced in May 1993 but were struck out at first instance by Mr Justice Clarke in July 1997 and this decision was upheld by the Court of Appeal in December 1998. The case was finally allowed to proceed to trial by the House of Lords in March 2001. Since that date there have been regular Case Management Conferences and interlocutory hearings (over 30 in all) dealing with a range of different issues, including two further appeals.
The claim is based in the tort of misfeasance in public office (the Bank cannot be sued for negligence). The Liquidators allege that the Bank failed in its statutory duty in its licensing and supervision of BCCI. If the Bank is found liable this case will obviously have major implications for regulators in financial and other sectors.
(This document is 10 pages long, appears to be 1.5-line spacing, followed by tables (3 pages) to chronicle the timeline of the litigation… over a decade’s worth).
This (again, from a basic Google search on the bank’s name and nothing else, April, 2022) is extensive, single-spaced “Executive Summary of the BCCI Affair” by detailed numbered paragraphs, followed by numbered recommendations at the bottom. It’s fine-print and no call-outs, graphics, just straight text (and headlines) — and it’s scathing. Please take the time to read it, and ask, why, in other sections of policy-making or government, should we have (should there be) ANY similarity to the practices that, taken as a whole here, still let BCCI (though it was eventually closed) get away with its strategy?
https://irp.fas.org/congress/1992_rpt/bcci/01exec.htm it’s hard to pick just one or two paragraphs to quote. I’m leaving the link. FAS.org is “Federation of American Scientists.” The ‘IRP” stands for “Intelligence Resource Program.” The website references two creators and states it’s no longer maintained (But latest entry, an “Annual Report” is dated Feb. 2022; I just read most of it…)
[END of the “BCCI” section.**]
**I’ve left “footprints” (shown above) here, so there is some overlap with the related post. Those quotes are longer, and combined with information from the “preview” gives more context for the BCCI story, and the connections of H.Con.Res.72 (USA “safe kids in custody courts resolution passed, I believe, in 2018, but being promoted in 2017) Arkansas and Senator Fulbright, etc. Full title to the related post (link ends “-ekW”) is at the bottom of this one Titles are subject to change before publication anyway. ]
~~ || ~~
My Basic Summary, Impromptu, By Recall (from the years of looking this up…)
For example, within the domestic violence (prevention and services) field, USA, it’s already been strategized and organized into statewide coalitions (primarily government-funded) with member organizations in each state (and/or territory), ALL tax-exempt and the delegated (and by law, better funded, from the US government at least), “Domestic Violence Resource Network” (on Twitter, I use “#DVRN”), itself a combination of entities and non-entities. The DVRN provides the main theory and information to distribute; the statewide coalitions provide feedback and control operations within each state (via membership status for pass-through grants, typically small).
Beyond that, by now we should know (but how many do?) that in the USA, as structured and organized by federal law and further controlled (significantly, when it comes to “the field” of domestic violence), domestic violence organizations provide a “heat shield” by consulting with fatherhood (marriage/fatherhood grants-funded) tax-exempt organizations, running fatherhood and father-engagement curricula and training through social services, and at the individual “case management” level, to help men in, for example, custody and visitation issues affected by either domestic violence / child abuse allegations and rebounding from having been in prison (i.e., re-entry). The “Batterers intervention” field (now re-named in several circles to a more innocuous and broader, less graphic/violent label) is an innate and since the 1980s has been considered central to any “DV Response” thanks in large part to specific tax-exempts given odd leadership status for decades at a time.
That’s a two-way street, with the domestic violence organizations (often at the state level) taking input and consultations from father-engagement professionals (i.e., fatherhood-grants-stream individuals and their nonprofits or for-profit businesses).
Look more closely at many of the leading male consultants from the United States expressing concern about domestic violence and running programs and you’ll find the concept of behavioral modification of dangerous men (and women) throughout. Likewise, trying to shift an entire nation’s values perception and action towards marriage/fatherhood, is also behavior modification. That is, perpetrator intervention programs.
(Ed Gondolf,[1] David Adams[2], originally Lundy Bancroft[3], David Mandel[4]), writing a book or two (Evan Stark[5], Lundy Bancroft: aimed more at the protective parents movement and featured (along with, strangely, Barry Goldstein[6]) by the Battered Mothers Custody Conference (about 2003 – now, held most years in New York State) and, along with the same, California Protective Parents Association); for the professionals involved, Jeffrey Edleson [7] (former dean of first, the University of Minnesota’s School of Social Work, then (after about three decades), then University of Berkeley’s School of Social Work, and with increasingly international focus on his publications; working closely for a while with Edleson (meaning, at University of Minnesota), Oliver Williams[8] (at University of Minnesota’s longstanding “non-entity” high up in the technical assistance and consulting hierarchy under USA’s V.A.W.A.-funded office, the US DOJ/OVW)… David Mandel is on the New York State COVID-19 Task Force Responding to DV (announced May, 2020) I’m breaking down (by affiliations) into table format here.
The footnoted names have made repeat appearances on both my blogging (including sections of a post dedicated to this concept, or individually] over the years. I am not 100% sure, but generally the states of origin or of main practice (early one) tend to be in the Northeastern USA (New England or Mid-Atlantic states), except for Edleson & Williams:
[1] Pennsylvania [2] Massachusetts (Emerge, running versions of “CaringDads® program adapted from Ontario/Canada: for which see Peter Jaffe, CREVAWC (and/or London Family Court Clinic, Inc.) [3] Bancroft has connections in NJ, but his family, to Massachusetts, and/or NY). Lundy also often picks women DV or family court survivors to promote his work, and has done so in Florida (℅ “Protective Mothers International” which incorporated ℅ California Protective Parents as fiscal agent — not under its own name) for a period. Bancroft’s original breakthrough book (?) Why Does He Do That? dates to about 2002)..[4] Mandel: Connecticut, with a global mindset and (obviously) connections, taking off in part from [5] (Also Connecticut) Evan Stark’s “coercive control” mantra and promoting it. [6] Disbarred attorney Barry Goldstein teamed up with (primarily) psychologist Mo Hannah, Ph.D., for greater access to (vulnerable, traumatized and “ready to be aimed at a cause framed in a certain way) battered mothers, originally New York State; [7] Minnesota & California: Jeffrey Edleson, (UMN Emeritus page: his personal page from that website: http://www.tc.umn.edu/~jedleson/ [alma matter, Ph.D., University of Wisconsin-Madison, M.S.W., University of Wisconsin-Madison] career academic (highly-placed), co-authored with (another sociologist, from Iowa, Susan Schechter (Sage In Memorium; Schechter died in 2004) the 1999 book,
Effective Intervention in Domestic Violence and Child Maltreatment Cases: Guidelines for Policy and Practice (1999, co-authored with Susan Schechter, NCJFCJ). Better known as the “Greenbook”, this best-practices guide has been the subject of six federally-funded and numerous other demonstration sites across the country. Prof. Edleson has also conducted intervention research and provided technical assistance to domestic violence programs and research projects across North America as well as in numerous other countries. (from https://www.jedleson.com, half-page image below)
The Greenbook Initiative 2000-2008 pilot programs run across family courts (USA) to handle the intersection between Domestic Violence, Child Custody and Child Maltreatment. The NCJFCJ (based in Reno, Nevada and frequent collaborator with AFCC (Based in Chicago, Illinois, despite its street address in Madison, Wisconsin) published the Edelson-Schechter book.
Edleson’s “In The News” section (bottom half of his personal webpage) boasts, apparently well-earned, about his wide influence on his two major fields of interest — not the women (the mothers), but CHILDREN exposed to domestic violence, and international child abduction (dealings with the Hague). He was Dean at UCBerkeley School of Social Welfare only 2012-2019, his major input had been at UMN, where he also founded “MNCAVA.”
Susan Schechter In Memoriam (Sage, 2004) (viewed 4/17/2022)
Jeffrey Edleson ‘In The News’ from his personal website (viewed 4/17/2022)
Jeffrey Edleson page as Professor Emeritus at UMN (viewed 4/17/2022)
These are quotes (several, not all) from the right-sidebar of middle image above, J.Edleson “In the News.” One of the programs (Jackson Katz, MVP) I still have an open browser window on as a typical, i.e., to this field, example of trademarked/certified-facilitated/marketed programming. Another cites IVAT on which I have a recent post (Robert Geffner et al.) Major careers are to be made and are sustainable in preventing, stopping, evaluating and writing about domestic violence. Too bad so little of that is made by the actual victims… who often continue as fugitives or might as well be fugitives for lack of protection where they first sought it through the courts).
Research by Brignone and Edleson mentioned in April 2020 Wired Magazine story on coronavirus and domestic violence. Original study was published in 2019 in the International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction.
Blog Navigation: Current Posts occur BELOW Sticky Posts. Tables Of Contents by Year and Others are Sticky). (One Widget, Many Boxes with Links). Rev. Dec. 2019; Split Apr. 2022
**Below Twelve (12) "Sticky" (pinned) posts, several of which are Tables of Contents. {{TOCs 2019 So Far, 2018 and Sept. 2012 - Dec. 2017, also listed separately, below on this Widget}}. Generally, for the most recent posts (access individually) scroll down on this sidebar to 'The Ten Most Recent 'Let's Get Honest' Posts' widget, updated automatically.
(Above link is to the blog's standing, static 'Current Posts' Page where all posts are shown. As a Page (not "Post") its case-sensitive short-link ends 'PsBXH-8v2'). Home page (Just type FamilyCourtmatters.org explains the shortlink protocols I also incorporate into posts (with 868 posts, you might too!) for internal cross-referencing
__________
FamilyCourtMatters.org default Front Page, LGH Top Picks, Themes ... and Why My Gravatar is a Blue Jay taking Flight. ((short-link ends "PsBXH-8o0" or just type in 'FamilyCourtMatters.org')(Long, Detailed, with Visuals on Current Topics, Orgs, ID's ongoing Thought-Leadership, Stakeholders (sic))<divPage was partitioned, generating off-ramped, updated posts (Sept. 2019ff), and further shortened (by adding a subsidiary page) Dec. 26, 2019) but still displays the level of drill-downs and explains the WHY of my diff''t approach as an investigative blogger.
________________
Consolidated Control of Domestic Violence Advocacy by Feminist Leadership REFUSING TO IDENTIFY, BY NAME and FINANCING, The Opposition Entities. **((It's a PAGE so short-link ends "/PsBXH-8rg")) [USA funding both sides of a gender war -- unequally should be questioned. We MUST understand the federally legislated funding which stacks the deck for ongoing conflict and ongoing fees for psych- and behavioral-health professionals and entrepreneurs, as opposed to in the public interest.] (Orig. from LGH 2018 Front page. May partition this page (onto another page or posts)! //LGH Oct. 2, 2019)
(This post finishes off-ramping four previously-shortened-version text widgets (with some July, 2019, updates), the title names them. Former versions of them were previously saved by posting in full on one or the other of the first two links above (with the word "Sidebar" in their titles) (links to full versions also stored on this post). THIS POST ALSO holds my narrative lead-in and footnotes around 'BMTP' (Battered Mothers Testimony Project){{=pdf of its Final Rept 2002}} at Wellesley Centers For Women, leading to my strongly-worded disclaimer/commentary on how, while misogyny (overall) is real and systemic, I disagree w standard feminist (so-called) domestic violence advocacy's protocol response to handling of Violence Against Women and Child Abuse 'IN the Family Courts'). My drill-down led me to better understanding of 1985ff (now, as 2 merged centers) Wellesley Center for Women's (WC4W's) historic psychoanalysis/ psychology focus and how funders of this influential, well-endowed, private, Boston-area, all-woman college's influential reporting (2002, example shown) are still effectively driving DV and VAWA policy. Still investigating... (see also Kathleen Stone Kaufmann, Wellesley '67(?) + her parents' "Stone Endowmt Fund")
____ (TOC 2017 (+ earlier) link above also accessible as internal link on (short) page "New to Blog?...," below.
______________________________________
[April, 2022] DONATE! To show appreciation and help me Justify Continuing this INVESTIGATIVE BLOGGING Begun March, 2009,** (Not Tax-Exempt: Yet). WHY ELSE? See Apr. 2022 Narrative in 5 text boxes.
**Below Several "Sticky" (pinned) posts, including Tables of Contents. {{separated by year}}. Generally, and to skip the "Sticky Posts" at top, for the most recent posts (access individually) scroll down on this sidebar to 'The Ten Most Recent 'Let's Get Honest' Posts' widget .
(The above link is to the blog's static 'Current Posts' Page where all posts (Sticky ones on top) display. As a Page (not "Post") its case-sensitive short-link ends 'PsBXH-8v2'). Home page (Static Front page, see next box) explains the shortlink protocols I also incorporate into posts (with 868 posts, you might too!) for internal cross-referencing AND if you wish to link to a specific post or page, pls. also always include its date posted. The "Archives " (Calendar widget) function also helpful for browsing by month back to 2009 or if you know which month.
This blog's default, static Front Page, LGH Top Picks, Themes ... and Why My Gravatar is a Blue Jay taking Flight. (short-link ends "PsBXH-8o0" or just type in 'FamilyCourtMatters.org') is long, detailed, with visuals on current topics and orgs. It identifies ongoing "Thought-Leadership," "Stakeholders" (sic) and holds many internal links to other pages or posts explaining certain topics, or even entities. It holds also the link to Current Posts near the top. Current posts are NOT posted below the Front Page but separately from it.
Page was partitioned, generating off-ramped, updated posts (Sept. 2019ff), and further shortened (by adding a subsidiary page) Dec. 26, 2019) but still displays the level of drill-downs and explains the WHY of my diff''t approach as an investigative blogger.
________________
________________
[Five sections (several paragraphs per section) of text removed from here Oct. 12, 2022. They'll show up again soon; I've moved them to their own post.//LGH.). I'm active still on Twitter, just not producing posts as frequently this past season...
(This is the blog's standing, Static 'Current Posts' Page where all posts are shown, so its case-sensitive short-link (being a 'Page') ends 'PsBXH-8v2')
_(TOC 2017 (+ earlier) link above also accessible as internal link on (short) page "New to Blog?...," below.
This PAGE (shortlink ends “PsBXH-8iP”) holds detailed drill-downs and supplements the next two POSTS('Chasing Down Corp + Charitable Registratn's'...Pt. 1, Pt. 2) shown next (below) on this text widget)This Page: is still relevant, a good read; deals w/ AFCC-member (Judge-Lawyer-Court Services Administrator) founded Kids'Turn, Internat'l Parental Kidnapping as regards the Hague Convention; and shows HOW specific non-profit coalitions organize to trademark programs + obtain federal grants, while using mis-leading language, (several) name-changing rapidly (SFCAPC became ' Safe+Sound,' etc.) and more..)
(This post finishes off-ramping four previously-shortened-version text widgets (with some July, 2019, updates), the title names them. Former versions of them were previously saved by posting in full on one or the other of the first two links above (with the word "Sidebar" in their titles) (links to full versions also stored on this post). THIS POST ALSO holds my narrative lead-in and footnotes around 'BMTP' (Battered Mothers Testimony Project){{=pdf of its Final Rept 2002}} at Wellesley Centers For Women, leading to my strongly-worded disclaimer/commentary on how, while misogyny (overall) is real and systemic, I disagree w standard feminist (so-called) domestic violence advocacy's protocol response to handling of Violence Against Women and Child Abuse 'IN the Family Courts'). Drill-down started led to better understanding of 1985ff (now, as 2 merged centers) WC4W's historic psychoanalysis/ psychology focus and funders of this influential, well-endowed, private, Boston-area, all-woman college's influential reporting (2002, example shown), effectively driving DV and VAWA policy. Still investigating... (see also Kathleen Stone Kaufmann, Wellesley '67(?) + her parents' "Stone Endowmt Fund")
This Absolutely Uncommon Analysis shouldn’t be! **
**Summer, 2019, Update/s: This widget formerly called "Contributions Welcome & Needed/Thanks." Its full contents are now on a separate post (linked above and below) and I'm deciding how much, if any, of this one to keep in place here..//LGH.
This Absolutely Uncommon Analysis shouldn't be!
What I do here: I expose the Systems Design, and the Designers, so Y.O.U. can Show Others, and to notify those playing certain games, "you've been flagged."
Heard of "disruptive technologies?" Disruptive innovations?
Well, this is a disruptive blog. I give people who've already been strung out and stripped down BY the system another place to stand and look at it, and a clear, fairly diagnostic language (vs. pretty logos and moving pictures) to describe it to others. AND, which many don't do, I tell how I found the information; links databases and all.
Despite the blog's appearance, I know what I'm doing! You're looking at long-term leverage, in the hands of the "non-experts," in the public interest, not public funded propaganda to drive business to private pockets. Hence, I'm not afraid to ask:
The formula for this public/private business model isn't really that complex, but the concept itself was just so devious, insidious, parasitic, grandiose, and by now, so baked into the economic, institutional infrastructure, people either don't notice, or, in a common, cowardly, but all too human response they see, and just start denying, or looking for nicer explanations of an ugly truth -- where it's heading. For lack of nicer, but still honest terms, it's heading towards yet more slavery (and tolerating it) and genocide (and tolerating it). [[2019 comments: and the ability to drive the U.S., in particular, into even more, bigger, and more costly/dangerous wars, discrediting us (further) internationally. But I wrote this sidebar many years ago..]]
As a woman, mother, a family court and domestic violence survivor [yes, he was a hitter, and more], who has already 'faced the music' in more ways than I can count, to the best of my ability, I do not do "denial." I also ask the public, what's left of it, to just not go down that Denial Road, and with it lose more of their innate humanity, perception, and ethics. There is another way out, one with a conscience:
Really want system change? Make up your mind to understand government financing -- change yourself first. Find and read your local "CAFR" (government's Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports), a wonderful source of information, with flow chart, descriptions of component or blended government units it's reporting on, and reporting the balances in each fund -- ever heard of a "Balance Sheet"? Looking for this also reveals just how many governmental business entities ARE there? Find them. Read. Think about what you see. What does it mean?
Governments tend to pool their investments, for example, "CALPERS" (essentially created ca. 1931) is the largest "public pension" investing platform around, or at least in the country. Getting started earlier sure helped, then adding players (subscribers) over time ALSO did. In 1985, add "CII" Council on Institutional Investors (members: in 31states and D.C.) (LA Times 1985 article on Calif. Politician (state treasurer, assembly speaker) Unruh whose idea it was for the Council so institutional funds could "flex their muscle"; and push for corporate governance reform. CII members now control $3 trillion of assets)-- my point being, government holdings are invested and when pooled like this, are major clout, but the average person never reads even a single government entity's annual financial reports to take a look. (I wasn't aware of them til 2012!)
Governments not only invest their funds in business, they also by legislation, patenting, and protections, set them up to win, or lose. So, "know thy government" is a great place to start. (See blog/see links in the blog).
[This Dialogue continued below under the sidebar widget "Really Want Systems Change?".]
2019 updates: This widget's (text box) full contents, along with others', now can be viewed (better -- full-page-width) at: Many of My Sidebar Widgets Now Live Here...[Published July 9, 2019]Published short (url short-link ends "-abt") (and may eventually replace current sidebar contents, or most of them). I also published a second, similar post with other sidebar widget contents(url short-link ends '-ahh') on July 19, 2019. Thanks for your patience (and any NOT-tax-exempt donations) meanwhile.//LGH
Copyright “fair use” doctrine cited USC Title 17 Ch 1 SEC. 107
The "fair use" doctrine allows limited reproduction of copyrighted works for educational and research purposes. The relevant portion of the copyright statue provides that the "fair use" of a copyrighted work, including reproduction "for purposes such as criticism, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research" is not an infringement of copyright. U.S.C. Title 17, Chapter 1, Sec. 107.
Doorways to Key Parts of This Blog (I split the long Dec. 2019 Widgets. Added 27 Apr. 2022).
Let's Get Honest! Absolutely Uncommon Analysis of Family & Conciliation Courts' Operations, Practices, & History 
Leave a Reply