Radar Alert - "First they ignore you, ...."

RADAR ALERT:
"First they ignore you, ..."

Two weeks ago, Slate.com's short-lived1 publication "Double X" published an article by Kathryn Joyce entitled "'Men's Rights' Groups Have Become Frighteningly Effective."2

This was not Slate.com's finest hour. One thing this article could never be accused of is objective reporting.

On Nov. 5th, the very same day the Double X article appeared, Salon.com's Broadsheet published an article by Judy Berman entitled "'Men's rights' groups go mainstream"3 that adds no new information, and simply seems to be an effort to repeat the Double X article to Salon's readers.

Since the Double X article appeared there have been several analyses of its flaws, the most recent being Cathy Young's article in Forbes: "Feminism should be about equality–for males too"4 which says:

"More than a quarter-century ago, British feminist philosopher Janet Radcliffe Richards wrote, 'No feminist whose concern for women stems from a concern for justice in general can ever legitimately allow her only interest to be the advantage of women.' Joyce's article is a stark example of feminism as exclusive concern with women and their perceived advantage, rather than justice or truth."

In "Journalistic Misrepresentation at Slate's New Woman-Oriented Publication 'Double X'"5, RADAR's Mark Rosenthal explained how the article had misrepresented his comments and also took issue with the article's characterization of Murray Straus as someone "who has written extensively on female violence," saying:

"The characterization of Straus as someone who has written extensively on female violence is like characterizing Susan B. Anthony as someone who wrote extensively on temperance – true but misleading because of what it leaves out. Straus has devoted his professional career to the study of all forms of family violence – parent-to-child, child-to-parent, sibling-to-sibling, as well as partner violence in all its configurations – male-to-female, female-to-male, and mutual. He has never focused exclusively on female violence."

And in a series of articles beginning with "Slate.com & Salon.com Criticize the Fatherhood Movement (Part I)"6, Glenn Sacks critiques the quality of the reporting, saying:

"The articles discuss various aspects and actors in the [men's and fathers] movement, and also quote and misquote me. ... I specifically, repeatedly, and emphatically told Joyce that any linkage between the men's & fathers' movements' grievances and Sodini is not my view, but I guess she was determined to jam it in there anyway."

Mahatma Gandhi is reputed to have said: "First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win." The joint Slate/Salon attack pieces are a good indication that we're well past stage 1. Congratulation to all RADAR supporters and allies for getting us this far. Let's keep it up!

Teacher has baby with 17-year-old student

Teacher has baby with 17-year-old student
Stuff.co.nz - Sunday Star Times - By CATHERINE WOULFE - 22/11/2009
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/education/3085999/Teacher-has-baby-with-17-year-old-student

A 17-year-old secondary school student and his 26-year-old female teacher had sex - and a baby - after bonding when putting the school yearbook together.

The teacher tried to stop the incident going public to protect her now two- year-old child, but it came to light on Friday when the disciplinary tribunal of the Teachers Council released a copy of its decision on the teacher's future.

Names of teachers, any students involved, and their schools are always deleted from these decisions.

The tribunal has not stripped the teacher of her registration. Instead, it has indefinitely suspended her practising certificate. Before she is allowed back into the classroom, the teacher must show she has addressed ethical and professional issues around power relationships between teachers and students.

The decision is not clear on whether the teacher and student are still romantically involved, saying only that they "maintain a relationship as a result of their joint parenting of the child".

The decision says the teacher and student had sex once, after classes finished for the year but while the student - who was in his final year of school - was still technically enrolled.

The teacher told the tribunal that, at the time, her marriage had recently broken up which left her feeling "alone and unstable at the end of my first year of teaching". She said she had never taught the student she slept with, but became close to him when she was put in charge of organising the yearbook, with which he was helping.

The pair "became friendly" and had sex after the student sent the teacher a text message inviting her to come and pick him up.

The decision said the teacher had emphasised that the student was "very nearly eighteen".

She said she found out early the following year that she was pregnant but kept it secret for a short time. She agonised over whether to keep the baby and decided she would, but required psychological help during her pregnancy, which was "a difficult time".

The student had left the school by this point and the teacher continued to work there before taking maternity leave. "She told us how the student had at that time returned from a period overseas, been supportive and became involved with their child," the decision said.

The teacher then decided she had to tell the school who her baby's father was. Shortly after the baby was born, in late 2007, she visited the acting principal, explained the situation to him and resigned. "She described the consensual nature of the relationship and how both families were supportive," the decision said.

The teacher said she was not making any excuses for her behaviour, which she regretted and which "weighed heavily on her mind".

"In particular, she said that she regretted how her behaviour had put her career at risk. She told us of her passion for teaching . . . She told us that she believed she was a good teacher . . . She said that she had learnt her lesson."

By law, the school had to report the teacher to watchdog body the Teachers Council. However, the acting principal told the council he thought censure - a type of formal warning that let teachers keep working - would be sufficient penalty.

The tribunal thought this an "unusual degree of leniency" and suspended the teacher's practising certificate, as well as censuring her and making her pay $1000 costs to the council. It refused her request to stop media from publishing the fact that the couple had a baby.

The teacher is now a fulltime mother surviving on the domestic purposes benefit and is living with her parents.

Holy Alphabet

Holy Alphabet... This is Beautiful



A lthough things are not perfect,
B ecause of trial or pain,
Continue in thanksgiving
D on't even think to blame.
E ven when the times are hard,
F ierce winds are bound to blow,
G od is forever able
H old on to what you know.
Imagine life without His love,
J oy would cease to be,
K eep thanking Him for all the things
L ove imparts thee to see.
Move out of ' Camp Complaining ',
No weapon that is known
O n earth can yield the power
P raise can do alone.
Quit worrying about the future,
R edeem the time at hand,
S tart every day with prayer
To 'thank' is God's command.
U ntil we see Him coming,
V ictorious in the sky,
We'll run the race with gratitude,
X alting God most high.
Y es, there'll be good times and yes some will be bad, but...
Z ion waits in glory...where none are ever sad!


'I AM Too blessed to be stressed!' The shortest distance between a problem and a solution is the distance between you knees and the floor.
The one who kneels to the Lord can stand up to anything..
Love and peace be with you forever, Amen.

Nickelback - If Everyone Cared

20% of Divorced Parents Want to Make Other Parent’s Contact with Child ‘as Unpleasant as Possible’

http://mensnewsdaily.com/glennsacks/2009/11/19/report-20-of-divorced-parents-want-to-make-other-parents-contact-with-child-as-unpleasant-as-possible/

Report: 20% of Divorced Parents Want to Make Other Parent’s Contact with Child ‘as Unpleasant as Possible’
Thursday, November 19, 2009
By Robert Franklin, Esq.
When parents are at loggerheads, there should be much more done to sustain the interests of the father and child. When a mother turns her child against the father, when a mother refuses to comply with a court order on contact, nothing is done because it is felt sanctions against her would not be in the interests of the child. But is the situation as it stands in that child’s interests? We pay only lip service to the rights of a child to have contact with a father and we need to do better.
This article is another one to address the findings of the Mishcon de Reya report on the impacts of divorce in the United Kingdom (The Times, 11/17/09). I discussed another article in the Telegraph in a previous piece, but this one adds information and some suggestions.
For example, the report found that more than one-third of children lose all contact with their fathers after divorce. It goes on to report just why that is.
But what makes keeping in touch so difficult?
One answer could be suggested by a finding of the Mishcon de Reya report — one in five divorcing spouses admitted to having the primary objective of making the experience as unpleasant as possible for his or her former partner.
Parenthetically, I wonder what all those people who deny the existence of parental alienation of children have to say about that. When 20% cite that very thing as their "primary objective" post-divorce, it's hard to figure how they can pretend parental alienation is a figment of some evil FRA's imagination. My guess is that we'll never know since they'll probably give that datum a pass.
And given that it's fathers, not mothers whom children are losing, and it's mothers, not fathers who get primary custody in 85% - 90% of cases, it's not hard to figure out who's doing most of the alienating.
But the article goes on to site some fairly commonsense things divorcing fathers and mothers can do to make things better. Unfortunately, many of those seem to assume some sort of residual goodwill between the exes. And if that existed, the problems children have stemming from divorce would probably be much fewer and less severe.
I suspect that there is a large percentage of parents who truly do their best to get along after they split and who mostly succeed. I also suspect that there is some percentage who will remain out to get the other regardless of everything. And I finally suspect that there are a lot of parents for whom counselling and mediation would be a great help. It's not that they'll feel much better about the other spouse, but they can learn to focus on the child's wellbeing and understand that, while he/she may want nothing to do with the other spouse, the child doesn't feel the same way.

Call for help for people in family court cases after suicides

Call for help for people in family court cases after suicides

Judge Boshier will not accept that his Court is gender bias and corrupt.Fact.I can supply detail to prove my point. I can supply evidence that a shows scum lawyers and sick psychologists from the unsavoury Family Court hounded my mother until she gave up and died even though a twisted Family Court judge said to me that my mum's request to be left out of any further proceedings would be granted. I have thought of suicide many times as no one in the Family Court listens to a father. RIP Mum. I WILL get even Boshier!!

Distress and parenting

My two daughters were brainwashed by a vengeful maternal family and assisted by a vindictive and totally corrupt justice system. The damage to my family has been horrific. RIP mum hounded to death by Family Court lawyers and psychologists who have leeched blood money from the major depressive episode since 2001! PAS is a real killer and extremely detrimental to the heartbroken forced client of the sinister Family Court. The gravy train in a sick system all earn a living from the most important Family Court file number! Scum of the earth enjoy PAS cases.

http://www.timesheraldonline.com/opinion/ci_13813822

Distress and parenting
Published By Times Herald
Posted: 11/18/2009 01:30:32 AM PST

Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS) is a collection of behaviors where one parent turns a child against the other parent. When a parent deprives a child of a healthy relationship with its other parent, the child may experience chronic psychological distress leading to the deterioration of the parental relationship. Since this distress can affect physical and mental health, health care professionals must not overlook the possibility that the child has been subjected to child abuse by the custodial parent.
Parental alienation often includes false accusations of child neglect, child maltreatment, and child sexual abuse. It also includes false accusations of domestic violence and blocking or inhibiting contact with a child by the offending parent. Those who commit parental alienation often threaten their child (or children) to fear or reject the other parent.
I have received a report that 50 mental health experts from 10 nations are a part of a larger effort to add parental alienation to the 2012 edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders by the American Psychiatric Association.

Third of family break-up children lose contact with fathers in ‘failing’ court system, poll

The New Zealand Family Court has destroyed my children. I will get EVEN !!

Third of family break-up children lose contact with fathers in ‘failing’ court system, poll

Tens of thousands of children a year are losing contact with their fathers because of “failing” family court system and disastrous custody arrangements, a study has found

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/relationships/divorce/6575997/Third-of-family-break-up-children-lose-contact-with-fathers-in-failing-court-system-poll.html

Iain Duncan Smith: Iain Duncan Smith attacks Ken Clarke over marriage tax breaks

Iain Duncan Smith said the family court system was 'a mess' with fathers too often shut out.

One in three children whose parents separated or divorced over the last 20 years disclosed that they had lost contact permanently with their father.

Almost a tenth of children from broken families said the acrimonious process had left them feeling suicidal while others later sought solace in drink, drugs or crime.

They complained of feeling “isolated” and “used” while parents admitted having used children as “bargaining tools” against each other.

Lawyers said the study showed that the court system itself was making family break-up more acrimonious with children used as "pawns".

They warned that so-called “no fault” divorces were encouraging warring parents to channel their “bloodletting” into disputes over contact.

Opposition politicians said the poll presented an alarming picture of a system “in a mess” which was all too often leaving fathers “shut out”.

The poll of 4,000 parents and children was carried out to provide a snapshot of the workings of the family court system exactly 20 years after the implementation of the landmark 1989 Children Act.

It found that a third of children from broken families had been tempted by drink or drugs while as many as 10 per cent had later become involved in crime.

A quarter of the children said that they had been asked to lie to one parent by the other and 15 per cent said they had even been called on to “spy” for their mother or father.

Meanwhile half of parents polled admitted deliberately drawing out the legal process for maximum benefit and more than two thirds conceded that they had used their children as “bargaining tools”.

About 250,000 couples, both married and non-married, separate every year affecting 350,000 kids, according to the Department for Children Schools and Families.

“The adversarial nature of the system invites people to come and use the courts system as a punch up and the children get used as pawns," said Sandra Davis, head of family law at Mishcon de Reya, for whom the poll was conducted.

“It polarises parents and it puts children in the middle of the antagonism.

“Some fathers back off because it is too painful to carry on litigating, they give up.”

Tim Loughton, the Tory Shadow children’s minister, said: “This is alarming evidence of the very detrimental impact it is having on the welfare of the children themselves.”

“Clearly, the court system is failing and is positively encouraging conflict - and continuing conflict.”

Iain Duncan Smith, the former Conservative leader and founder of the Centre for Social Justice, warned that young people were bearing the scars of a divorce “boom” and a resulting lack of father figures.

“It is a mess, it needs a complete overhaul," he said. "It is an organisation locked in secrecy and deeply unhelpful to the parents and the children and all too often able to exacerbate the problems that they are about to face.”

David Laws, the Liberal Democrat children’s spokesman, added: “In too many cases the children become caught up in the crossfire between two warring parties in a system which sometimes encourages the parents to take entrenched positions.”

Miss Davis called for compulsory mediation for parents hoping to use the divorce courts rather than the current ”tick box” exercise for those seeking legal aid.

But a spokesman for the Children’s Society said that compulsion “goes against everything we have learned from many, many years of experience”.

Delyth Morgan, the children’s minister, added: “Divorce and separation can have a devastating impact on children caught in the middle.

“But this survey, looking as far back as 20 years ago, simply doesn’t reflect what support is available for families now … we have acted to give families comprehensive counselling, practical and legal support.”

The Hypocrisy of the UK Government.

Jimmy says "The Prime Minister is to apologise for forced deporting of children fr0m 1930 to 1970. But they are still at it. Social services are still snatching children and telling them falsely that their families do not want them and also telling grandparents and extended family that the children do not want to see them either. (Parental Alienation) This confuses and demoralises children into accepting forced adoption to complete strangers. An excellent cost cutting business plan! But children are not commodities.

Extract from the ‘Social Work Action Magazine’ Social work conference.

Quote “Social workers said they did not become SW so that they could be ‘case managers or have to make decisions based on money rather on what was needed” End Quote.



He will combine it with an apology to the 7,000 child migrants from Britain who still lives in Australia.

As they were compulsorily shipped out of Britain, many of the children were told - wrongly - their parents were dead, and that a more abundant life awaited them.

Many parents did not know their children, aged as young as three had been sent to Australia. Child care agencies (guess who they are) worked with the government to send disadvantaged children to a rosy future and supply what was deemed "good white stock" to a former colony.



Full story. http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/em/-/1/hi/uk/8361025.stm

Mom sentenced to prison for abducting kids :: The Courier News :: Local News

Mom sentenced to prison for abducting kids :: The Courier News :: Local News

How Forrest Gump should have ended

USA Family Court judge suspended for 45 days

"the commission found that Gormley entered a change of custody order that removed a child from the custody of her father but denied the father the right to put on his own evidence."

I was denied the right of defence that would have proved that I was a decent father by Judge John Strettell in the Ashburton Court 17 December 2001.Filthy low life Ashburton lawyers Chris Robertson, Paul Finnigan and Geoff Kean helped the bent judge shaft me and force me into a eight year fucking nightmare. Dirty scum of the earth pricks need to be held accountable. Oh by the way my major depressive episode cost the country millions and it could have been cut dead in its tracks if that sinister evil judge had let me give evidence that would have cleared my name.
The Family Court is a gender bias hell hole!!
I hope the children and grand children read about these professional Family Court filth when they google these creeps' name in the future. How can a so called Court deny anybody a defence Judge Rotten Strettell? You c##t!!!

http://www.kentucky.com/latest_news/story/1002833.html?storylink=MI_emailed

Victoria’s lawyers being sued in landmark test case

Victoria’s lawyers being sued in landmark test case
Thursday 15 October 2009
http://www.familylawwebguide.com.au/news/pg/news/view/761/index.php&filter=2


A senior human rights lawyer has joined the backlash of criticism of Victoria's lawyers and judges including recent damning criticisms by Federal Attorney-General Robert McClelland and Victorian Attorney-General Rob Hulls.

Human rights lawyer and activist James Johnson from law firm Sutton Lawyers has launched a test case to confirm that, thanks to the new Victorian Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities, Victorians can now for the first time sue Australian barristers and solicitors for negligence and other improper conduct in Court proceedings - even if other Australian's are not as lucky.

Mr Johnson alleges that he was disadvantaged by the negligent and unethical practices of lawyers during recent legal proceedings. Now, in a landmark test case Mr Johnson is testing the new human rights laws, suing the Minister for Human Services Usa Neville, 4 family law lawyers and a family law court judge. "Australia's barristers and litigation solicitors are the only professionals who are not legally liable for negligence in the work place," he said. "This situation no longer exists in other English speaking legal systems.

Laws in Britain, the US, Canada and a host of European countries have removed lawyers' immunities, and citizens in those countries are able to sue lawyers over their actions, words and conduct in court."

The announcement of Mr Johnson's test case comes not long after the publication of a damning report by Victorian State Ombudsman George Brouwer reporting on large scale misconduct and incompetence by Victoria's peak legal regulator, Victorian Legal Services Commissioner Ms Victoria Marles, who has subsequently tendered her resignation.

Mr Johnson says that basic human rights, including the right to a fair trial and the principle of equality under the law are key rights guaranteed by Mr Hull's Human Rights Charter. Mr Johnson claims that during the recent Court proceedings he suffered substantial injustice when he was denied these basic human rights. "Special laws made by judges protecting lawyers from negligence claims have always been incompatible with the basic human right of equality under the law. Basic rights to a fair hearing are also undermined when barristers are able to get away with negligent, unethical and even fraudulent misconduct."

"These special laws just for lawyers have bred arrogance among a small group of lawyers and it flies in the face of Victoria's Charter of Human Rights," he said. "Our Victorian Attorney-General Rob Hulls has publicly criticised judges for their aloofness has been demanding cultural change. But these same cultural attitudes of superiority are prevalent throughout the legal profession. Barristers and solicitors and not just judges need to undergo urgent cultural change. We have a situation where a small number of negligent and corrupt lawyers are causing irreparable damage to the professional images of a majority of hard-working, ethical and competent lawyers. And the legal professional bodies and regulators are slow to respond to the problem."

Other prominent lawyers have expressed the same kinds of concerns as Mr Johnson. Retired Victorian

Supreme Court Judge, Professor George Hampel has been a long time advocate of universal professional negligence laws, arguing that it is for the good of the profession as well as for the good of the public, that negligence laws should not discriminate in favour of lawyers.

Retired High Court Justice Michael Kirby also been vocal in criticisng this historical defect in Australian's professional negligence laws working in favour of lawyers. He served up a strong rebuke to his fellow judges and lawyers in 2005, the last time the High Court heard a case challenging for the right to sue a barrister for negligence.

"I question why an anomalous immunity is not only preserved in Australia but now actually enlarged by a binding legal rule that will include out-of-court advisings and extend to protect solicitors as well as barristers," he wrote. 'With all due respect to those of the contrary view, I regard such a decision as legally erroneous, unwarranted and unworthy.""Over the course of a century, (the High Court) has heard countless cases in which negligence has been alleged against professional and other skilled persons. Thus, it has held to legal account architects, civil engineers, dental surgeons, and specialist physicians and surgeons, anaesthetists, electrical contractors, persons providing financial advice, police officers, builders, pilots solicitors (in respect of out-of-court advice) and teachers," he said, saying it was impossible to see how lawyers could justify special treatment by the law.

But in 2005 the majority of other Judges sitting on the High Court disagreed. They noted that, unlike the United Kingdom, Australia did not yet have a national Bill of Rights. Mr Johnson said that "Back in 2005 the absence of a national Bill of Rights allowed wriggle room for the majority of the High Court Judges to rule that Victoria's barristers and solicitors, including me, were somehow special compared to all other Australian professionals.

The High Court, by a majority went against the international trend to put lawyers on the same legal status as everyone else. Over Justice Kirby's criticisms they extended the law to protect Victoria's litigation solicitors, not just Victoria's barristers, from professional negligence law suits."

Australia today is one of only three countries (along with Burma and Chile) that still doesn't have a national Bill of Human Rights. But, as Mr Johnson points out, Victoria now has a Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities.

According to Mr Johnson "Justice Kirby delivered a strongly written rebuke to his fellow Judges, saying that these laws keeping special legal protection for lawyers was nothing more than what he called an 'inadmissible empathy' - a 'sympathetic understanding confined to lawyers', because Australian judges are themselves lawyers. The outrageousness of the special protection speaks for itself since these bad laws have been removed in all other English speaking countries.

Justice Kirby said that this excuse 'will not do'. And there are many honest, dedicated lawyers who agree with him." "Equality under the law, the 'rule of law' is the single biggest contribution the English legal system has made to democracy, world peace and prosperity. It is something that English judges and courts have championed for hundreds of years - well before Attorney-General Hull's Victorian Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities. And yet, somehow, English judges managed to create laws protecting English lawyers from being sued for negligence and a whole range of other kinds of misconduct during court proceedings.

Then, somehow, while ever other English speaking country realised during the 20th century that these special laws were wrong and removed them, in 2005 Australia's judges actually went with new laws discriminating even more favourably in favour of Australian lawyers.

According to Mr Johnson "The challenge for human rights lawyers and advocates will be if this test case is not succesful. Special laws protecting negligent barristers and solicitors from being sued are a major, if not fatal, road block to the introduction of human rights laws. Whether we are talki.ng about the Victorian Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities which is existing law, or we are talking about a future Bill of Rights for Australia. If our lawyers wont accept something as basic as equal liability under professional negligence laws they can hardly be counted on to stand up and protect Australian's against other human rights violations either.

It is no coincidence that Australia has the third worst human rights records amongst the 132 members of the United Nations."

Mr Johnson hopes that his test case will bring Australia's laws, and Australian lawyers, into line with standards in other English speaking countries. "Australia's lawyers and professional bodies should be welcoming and encouraging this reform just as English lawyers did in 2000. New laws, demonstrated by a handful of cases requiring a few unethical lawyers to compensate people they have wronged will do wonders to improve public faith in the integrity of the legal profession."



Attached the article from Sunday's Herald Sun on one of several test cases that human rights law firm, Sutton Lawyers (of 1st Floor 141 Osborne Street South Yarra Vic 3141) is currently running in the Victorian Supreme Court.

As luck would have it, attached is a second article (on an unrelated case) where senior lawyers misbehaving in the Supreme Court have been strongly rebuked and face serious misconduct charges. This is a good sign (especially in the context of the criticisms of judges and other lawyers that have been aired by the Victorian and the Federal Attorney-Generals in recent weeks).

This sort of misconduct by lawyers is of course par for the course in the family law courts. Sutton Lawyer's test case in the Supreme Court involves misconduct by 4 family lawyers misbehaving in the
Supreme Court and in the family court and 2 judges (supreme court and family court). It is only a matter of time until these family lawyers are ordered to pay substantial civil damages, and face serious
professional disciplinary proceedings and probably criminal charges too.

Please FORWARD this email and attachments, please post them etc far and wide to all dads groups and journalists in your contact list, with a request that they also on-forward, post etc.

As one of several initiatives I am looking to establish a mens right group to be known as 'Women In Favour of Equality' (ie WIFE organization) learning from how the female suffragettes achieved 'equal political rights' at the turn of the 1900s only because of the actions of men like HG Wells who were 'men in favour of equality.' So I would be especially pleased to hear from women willing to take up positive roles in WIFE Organization.

The best way for anyone to contact me is by ordinary snail mail at Sutton Lawyers (as per above postal address). Now is the time for the truth to be put out to everyone who is willing to receive it.

I have reason to believe (inside information) that the national family court industry, worth $6bn per annum to these corrupt family lawyers, is in danger of very substantial collapse from within. Stay tuned for
more details.

Best wishes James Johnson Human Rights Lawyer

Crystel Strelioff sentenced to 12 years for abducting children

Crystel Strelioff sentenced to 12 years for abducting children

Posted using ShareThis

BRITAIN'S MASONIC JUDGES THE BIGGEST THREAT TO FAMILIES IN THE UK

BRITAIN'S MASONIC JUDGES THE BIGGEST THREAT TO FAMILIES IN THE UK
masonic court The Justice secretary Zionist Jack Straw announced yesterday that judges in England and Wales, who had to previously declare if they were masons no longer require that declaration.This is as a direct challenge by the United Grand Lodge of England who threatened him with taking the matter to the European Court of Human Rights.

We have been concerned for many years that the ECHR conventions are being undermined by JUDGES, not juries, deciding on matters relating to the UK's draconian and menacing judicial mafia.

Judges sitting in the ECHR courts may very well be undermining the very nature of human rights by also being members of secret societies and that their perspective of HUMAN RIGHTS relates only to those affecting their brothers and the rest of the population can continue to be ruthlessly destroyed by the powers these masonic judges within the UK have stealthily given themselves. We know British judges are NOT intimidated by threats of victims taking their case to Europe. NO JUDGE has the jurisdiction in any case when either party requests a jury , particularly in civil actions when vast estates are being seized by masonic judges in draconian decisions that they should NEVER have been allowed to take.

Our courts have been high jacked by judicial masons, as proven by the United Grand Lodges continued threats, as it is the power of MASONS that has been proven time and again to be in the hands of the judges that sit in judgement in cases across the United Kingdom and across the globe. This ensures their ultra rich hierarchy can continue the class system that has seen the massive disparity between the rich and poor. Courts and its judicial hierarchy of masonic judges are the main criteria in keeping us all in our lowly place and court powers will ensure our assets are seized if at any time we become a threat to the thugs now running the UK for their own financial gain.

The growing dissent among British victims, their families and friends and also the wider population cannot be stifled any longer by these thugs and bully boys who have been getting increasingly away with murder in how these courts operate. Even a recent comment by the chairman of the Bar Standards Board Lady Deech were she stated "another example of a law imposed on us by the judiciary, without any reference to Parliament" in that family courts are being abused by judges, many if not all masons, who have been for centuries using them as a means for the state to fleece the victims who cannot get juries . Instead making decisions on a lifetime of work invested in assets and homes that are seized using court orders that are wholly illegal and then railroaded through by corrupt judges and lawyers. Later those stolen assets and homes being made available to masons to buy up at vastly reduced cost and one of the incentives they use to sell their soul to a satanic order that brainwashes and blackmails its members who ruthlessly attack anyone who dares challenge their power and money grabbing scams.

Jack Straw has laid down the gauntlet to the millions of victims of these thugs who will continue their reign of terror unless they are stopped . Everyone should avoid at all costs using courts as a means to settle disputes as JUSTICE is non-existent while theft of property is rife by that legal mafia . Marriage ,once a religious preserve is now a meal ticket for the masons who are building their power and wealth using judges to redistribute OUR assets into their hands and living opulent lifestyles on the backs of draconian powers within those courts. Their victims have collated evidence over many years for anyone as yet to face these monsters who remain the biggest threat by far in the UK, despite all the corporate media spin on terror threats from outside the UK.

The amount of lives lost through terrorism(their smokescreen) pales next to the vast army of victims who have been psychologically tortured, abused, bullied and destroyed by this evil network that Straw has bowed to their demands and threats .That we will continue to EXPOSE and take whatever measures are needed to oppose the impact this decision is having on our rights and freedoms. There is no doubt that the more ruthless these evil barstewards become the more the vast majority of the population will resist when they are faced with ever more victims coming forward and telling how their lives have been destroyed by these mobsters. THAT WE HAVE NEVER HAD ANY DOUBT ABOUT THAT THEY CANNOT AND WILL NOT WIN THIS WAR AGAINST OUR FAMILIES.

UK JUDGES NO LONGER HAVE TO DECLARE FREEMASONRY

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/lawandorder/6509916/Judges-no-longer-have-to-declare-Freemasonry.html

At Supreme Court: Can prosecutors be sued for framing defendants? | csmonitor.com

At Supreme Court: Can prosecutors be sued for framing defendants? | csmonitor.com

Posted using ShareThis

I Can't Tell You Why - Eagles

UK - Solicitors overpaid millions by LSC for legal aid work

My seven year Family Court battle provided work for over a 100 legal aid lawyers and psycho babble liars. They destroyed my family and help kill my mother. These scum of the earth filth were ALL paid for by the New Zealand taxpayer! These people have destroyed my daughters.Of course the terrible ordeal was all built on false allegations of sexual abuse and domestic violence. These legal aid leeches should be publically hung! I have more than enough grounds to sue the sicko's.

Solicitors overpaid millions by LSC for legal aid work

Posted using ShareThis

British police categorize political activists as ‘domestic extremists’

Fathers' rights activists would be 'caught' by this British Government stalking 'definition' of "domestic extremists".

Apparently it's wrong for citizens to stalk (aka monitor) but OK for The State and its police.

Not sure though which of the four categories they would listed under ... probably "extreme right".

Quote: Activists are divided up into four groups: Extreme right, extreme left, animal rights and anti-war. Groups roped in to the database even include those that have never been associated with any illegal activity.

------------------------------------------

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/oct/25/police-domestic-extremists-database

The Guardian
25 October 2009

Police in £9m scheme to log 'domestic extremists'
Thousands of activists monitored on network of overlapping databases
By Paul Lewis, Rob Evans and Matthew Taylor

Audio: Mark Thomas: 'I'm going to use it on my posters' (3:53min)
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/audio/2009/oct/27/police-database-mark-thomas
Comedian Mark Thomas gives his reaction to finding out that his name -
along with those of thousands of other political activists and protesters -
is being stored by police on a secret database

Police are gathering the personal details of thousands of activists who attend political meetings and protests, and storing their data on a network of nationwide intelligence databases.

The hidden apparatus has been constructed to monitor "domestic extremists", the Guardian can reveal in the first of a three-day series into the policing of protests. Detailed information about the political activities of campaigners is being stored on a number of overlapping IT systems, even if they have not committed a crime.

Senior officers say domestic extremism, a term coined by police that has no legal basis, can include activists suspected of minor public order offences such as peaceful direct action and civil disobedience.

Three national police units responsible for combating domestic extremism are run by the "terrorism and allied matters" committee of the Association of Chief Police Officers (Acpo). In total, it receives £9m in public funding, from police forces and the Home Office, and employs a staff of 100.

An investigation by the Guardian can reveal:

- The main unit, the National Public Order Intelligence Unit (NPOIU), runs a central database which lists thousands of so-called domestic extremists. It filters intelligence supplied by police forces across England and Wales, which routinely deploy surveillance teams at protests, rallies and public meetings. The NPOIU contains detailed files on individual protesters who are searchable by name.

- Vehicles associated with protesters are being tracked via a nationwide system of automatic number plate recognition (ANPR) cameras. One man, who has no criminal record, was stopped more than 25 times in less than three years after a "protest" marker was placed against his car after he attended a small protest against duck and pheasant shooting. ANPR "interceptor teams" are being deployed on roads leading to protests to monitor attendance.

- Police surveillance units, known as Forward Intelligence Teams (FIT) and Evidence Gatherers, record footage and take photographs of campaigners as they enter and leave openly advertised public meetings. These images are entered on force-wide databases so that police can chronicle the campaigners' political activities. The information is added to the central NPOIU.

- Surveillance officers are provided with "spotter cards" used to identify the faces of target individuals who police believe are at risk of becoming involved in domestic extremism. Targets include high-profile activists regularly seen taking part in protests. One spotter card, produced by the Met to monitor campaigners against an arms fair, includes a mugshot of the comedian Mark Thomas.

- NPOIU works in tandem with two other little-known Acpo branches, the National Extremism Tactical Coordination Unit (Netcu), which advises thousands of companies on how to manage political campaigns, and the National Domestic Extremism Team, which pools intelligence gathered by investigations into protesters across the country.

Denis O'Connor, the chief inspector of constabulary, will next month release the findings of his national review of policing of protests. He has already signalled he anticipates wide scale change. His inspectors, who were asked to review tactics in the wake of the Metropolitan police's controversial handling of the G20 protests, are considering a complete overhaul of the three Acpo units, which they have been told lack statutory accountability.

Acpo's national infrastructure for dealing with domestic extremism was set up with the backing of the Home Office in an attempt to combat animal rights activists who were committing serious crimes. Senior officers concede the criminal activity associated with these groups has receded, but the units dealing with domestic extremism have expanded their remit to incorporate campaign groups across the political spectrum, including anti-war and environmental groups that have only ever engaged in peaceful direct action.

All three units divide their work into four categories of domestic extremism: animal rights campaigns; far-right groups such as the English Defence League; "extreme leftwing" protest groups, including anti-war campaigners; and "environmental extremism" such as Climate Camp and Plane Stupid campaigns.

Anton Setchell, who is in overall command of Acpo's domestic extremism
remit, said people who find themselves on the databases "should not worry
at all". But he refused to disclose how many names were on the NPOIU's
national database, claiming it was "not easy" to count. He estimated they
had files on thousands of people. As well as photographs, he said FIT
surveillance officers noted down what he claimed was harmless information
about people's attendance at demonstrations and this information was fed
into the national database.

He said he could understand that peaceful activists objected to being
monitored at open meetings when they had done nothing wrong. "What I would
say where the police are doing that there would need to be the proper
justifications," he said.

404 comments