It’s All about Love

I had someone recently try to convince me in a round about way to return to an organization I was once part of.    The reasoning was that there are people there that still care about me.

I am well aware of that-they are the same people who cared about me while I was there.  But as most married people will tell you, “love is not enough.”   It does not matter how many people care if the organization itself is flawed in policies or the way it shows love.  When the organization has been told repeatedly that there are problems and does nothing about them, then love is not enough.

I was not and am not the only person that was or is unhappy there either.  There are many people there who are also unhappy, which should give that organization something to think about.  Why are there so many different people/personalities there who are not happy?  Perhaps it is because love is not enough.

 

Not Too Pleased

So far my challenging situation is not improving.  I just discovered that something I was told not to do,  is now being done.  All parties involved heard this restriction, but now someone else is doing it-and this someone else found it insulting when I was doing it.

For people who supposedly are interested in improving the situation, they are doing the opposite.  I wonder if they even know that the other person is doing this…but I can’t tell them without getting the outside person in trouble and I don’t want to do that.  But it angers me greatly: again showing that one set of rules apply to me and another to this other person.

Not pleased at all.

Social Services in Pennsylvania

There is another state that has a problem with their social service system: Pennsylvania.

“The nightmare of forced starvation and infection that killed Danieal while she was under the protection of the city’s human services agency is documented in a 258-page grand jury report released this week that charges nine people — her parents, four social workers and three family friends — in her ghastly death.”

This family had been under the scrutiny of social services for years. Social services falsified reports of their visits and the Assistant Health Commissioner interfered in the investigation of the girl’s death.

The article says the girl lived with her father in her early years and things went well until the father moved back to Philadelphia. It sounds like the father had custody of the girl because they were in Arizona before returning to Philadelphia-and he also had his other children with him.

Why didn’t the mother have custody? What happened there? And what happened for the mother to regain custody?

I wonder if social services made life so difficult for him while he was there that they drove him out? It’s a tactic they use often. Also, the father did care for her when he was in Arizona, and it seems odd that he would suddenly stop doing that once he got to Philadelphia.

This proves once again that social services, as a system, is broken.

Technorati Tags: social services, death, corruption

Powered by ScribeFire.

Recruiters Still Lying

Some army recruiters are lying and intimidating recruits to go into service. This report focuses on Houston, but I’m sure there is trouble in other areas too.

The army has a DEP-delayed entry program where recruits can try out the military and then walk away if they discover it is not for them. ”

“Army recruiting regulations say delayed entry members can leave any time. They specifically mention “under no circumstances will any (recruiter) threaten, coerce, manipulate, or intimidate (future soldiers), nor may they obstruct separation requests.”

Further, they state: “At no time will any (recruiter) tell a (Delayed Entry Program) member he or she must go in the Army or he or she will go to jail.”

This is the opposite of what some recruits were told-that they would go to jail, and they would not be able to get any loans for college since they did not join the army. One person was told that if he did not show up for an interview he would have to go to jail and this was back in 2005.

What happened to that recruiter? He was promoted to station commander at a different recruiting station, training others on how to do the job. A job he still holds today, although in a different state. This way the harassment gets to be spread around the country, which seems to be their goal.

Allegations of this type have increased over the years-due in part to the monetary bonuses recruiters get when a recruit gets to basic training. What kind of soldiers will we have once they realize they were betrayed by their recruiters? Do you think we will have loyal ones due to their shenanigans?

“The recruiter against whom the allegations were made has been taken off recruiting duty pending the outcome of the investigation,” the Army said.”

How long until he gets promoted, I wonder?

Technorati Tags: army, recruits, lying, manipulation

Powered by ScribeFire.

How Many Shocks Does It Take?

It took 7 to kill 21 year old Scooter Pikes. They actually tasered him nine times in fourteen minutes, but he was unconscious during the last two shocks. It is my opinion that he was already dead by the time the last two shocks were given.

The police spotted Pikes and went to arrest him on an outstanding drug warrant. He took off and was pursued. A second officer cornered him when the first officer (Nugent) came by. Pikes resisted arrest so Nugent gave him the first taser blast.

According to the Police Chief-who was not there at this incident-Pikes fell ill, said he was on drugs and had asthma. An ambulance was called and Pikes died at the hospital.

The autopsy shows us something different-there were no drugs in his system, nor did he have asthma. Knowing all the trouble one can get into if one was on drugs, why would a sober Pikes even say that to the arresting officers?

“Moreover, Pikes did not resist arrest, and he was handcuffed while lying on the ground, according to Nugent’s police report of the incident. It was only after Pikes refused Nugent’s command to stand up that the officer applied the first Taser shock in the middle of his back, Nugent wrote.”

We now have proof that the police chief is lying. Pikes kept being shocked because he was not responding to orders quickly enough. Let us ponder this for a moment. What does a taser do? It paralyzes your body so you cannot move. If you’ve been tasered, it stands to reason that you might need a few minutes before you can move again or in Pikes case, get up.

Nugent did not think about this though so he kept tasering Pikes, thereby decreasing Pikes’ mobility further, and in Nugent’s mind giving him more reason to continue paralyzing Pikes.

The ambulance was not called while Pikes was in the car. It was called after they carried an unconscious Pikes into the station and he was already dead slumped over in his chair.

The official cause of death:

“...Pikes’ death was a homicide. On the death certificate, he listed the cause of death as “cardiac arrest following nine 50,000-volt electroshock applications from a conductive electrical weapon.”

The coroner has been doing this for 33 years and is known for his independent investigations. Due to his penchant for truth, he has been shot at 19 times and once his garage was firebombed. I guess he can look forward to more of the same from this case.

The taser use by Nugent was against his own department’s policy:

“The Taser shall only be deployed in circumstances where it is deemed reasonably necessary to control a dangerous or violent subject,” the policy states. It also requires that a suspect who has been Tasered should immediately be checked out at a hospital, which did not happen in Pikes’ case.”

The manufacturer of the taser says that repeated, continuous or simultaneous exposures should be minimized, and our own Justice Department says no one knows the medical risks of repeated taser exposure.

Nugent has been fired from his job.

Technorati Tags: civil liberties, homicide, tasers

Powered by ScribeFire.

Rhode Island Microchipping Students

“The Middletown School District, in partnership with MAP Information Technology Corp., has launched a pilot program to implant RFID chips into the schoolbags of 80 children at the Aquidneck School. Each chip would be programmed with a student identification number, and would be read by an external device installed in one of two school buses. The buses would also be fitted with global positioning system (GPS) devices.”

The article goes on to tell us that officials and parents can see which students entered which bus and where the bus is. If a student does not want to be monitored, all he needs to do is switch bags with someone else, or take one bag to school and then switch to a different bag once he’s there. No one would have any idea that bags were switched until the “wrong student” appears in a place he wasn’t expected.

Not to mention that the chips are not as safe as one believes-anyone with a the right kind of reader can read the information and then use it for identity theft or harassment or burglary of that home. Plus what will be the long term health effects of having this chip so close to the area of the body the chip is against?

“There’s absolutely no need to be tagging children,” said Stephen Brown, executive director of the ACLU’s Rhode Island chapter. According to Brown, the school district should already know where its students are.”

Agreed-if the district does not know where it’s own students are, they have bigger problems than they realize. And as I pointed out earlier, all one has to do is switch bags to go undetected.

“Because the pilot program is being provided to the school district at no cost, it did not require approval from the Rhode Island ethics commission.”

As long as it is free, it doesn’t matter what program or thing it is;one must take it seems to be the message the district is sending its students.

Technorati Tags: chips, tracking, surveillance, civil liberties, privacy

Powered by ScribeFire.

Irish Eyes Aren’t Smiling

Ireland has rejected the EU treaty, also called the Lisbon treaty-formerly known as the EU consititution. Perhaps the crafters of this consitution were hoping that changing the wording would help the document pass. Fortuantely the Irish were not taken in by this manuever.

According to the EU’s own laws,that means this treaty can no longer be considered for ratification:

“The bill before the British parliament must be withdrawn because under
the European Union’s own laws this cannot proceed now. The Lisbon
treaty is dead.”

Not to worry-the facts won’t deter the ratification process:

“The result of the Irish referendum on the Lisbon Treaty should be
“respected and digested” but the UK “must keep the ratification process
going”, he said.

EC President Jose Manuel Barroso said it will be discussed next week but the Tories said it must be “declared dead”.

What is there left to discuss? They have to scrap that treaty and start drafting another one. There should not be any discussion about ratification until they come up with another treaty/constitution.

The votes don’t matter to either the Foreign Secretary of the UK nor to the EC President as they have both stated :

“I think it is right that we follow the view that each country must see the ratification process to a conclusion,” he said.”…

“Mr Barosso called on other members states to continue ratifying the
treaty, insisting it was “alive and we should now try to find a
solution”.

The powers behind the EU are saying that each country must ratify the treaty. It matters not that voters have said no. It doesn’t matter that the EU’s own alws say that if the treaty is not ratified by all of the membetr countries, the treaty can not proceed.

They want the treaty to go through and if they can’t get the voters to aqueice to their demands, their next step will be to get rid of voting on it entirely and just ahve all the leaders agree to it.

After France rejected the treaty, that was when they had all those riots between natives and non-natives which I think was a punishment meant to show them what happens to a country that votes no.

Iw onder what Ireland’s punishment will be?

Powered by ScribeFire.

More of a Victory? Not

I mentioned in my earlier post that the Texas Supreme Court ruling to return all the children was only a partial victory since the parents still do not have the children and the state still has control over them.

I also said that CPS would try everything they could to keep the children in their power. That’s exactly what happened today:

“By the time the third version was introduced, the language was made stronger and in CPS’ favor. It would be in place indefinitely so that state officials connected with the ongoing child abuse investigation “SHALL be allowed access to said property at any and all times.”

Wonder what the other objections were? There were actually three versions of the agreement:the first one being CPS have access to the ranch from 8 a.m. to 8p.m., members needed to cooperate with them and this agreement would end at the end of summer.  Remember that in CPS lingo, cooperate means do whatever they say without question.

We’re not sure what the second agreement was, but here is the third agreement-the one Walthers agreed to:

“…In order to take custody, FLDS parents or their designees must produce an affidavit and have themselves and their children photographed at the time of taking
possession of the child,” according to the order.

Also, the children would not be allowed to leave the state for at least 90 days, and if the families move within Texas, the parents must notify the state seven working days prior to the relocation.

And if the children were to travel within state lines more than 60 miles from where they live, the state must be told at least 48 hours in advance.

The judge also would have required that state officials be allowed access to the YFZ Ranch “at any and all times necessary to the investigation if any children are there. In addition, mothers and fathers must take parenting classes.”

No wonder they objected. Not only that, but one attorney pointed out that in order to add provisions to the order, there needs to be a separate hearing. In other words, this attorney wants the judge to follow the policy set forth by law for adding provisions to the agreement.

Then the judge said she would sign the first version of the agreement as long as signatures of all 43 FLDs members were on it. Notice-not all their attorneys sign the agreement-each individual client has to sign it-something that is very rare:

“Laura Shockley, a lawyer for several sect children, said few judges in her experience required signatures from an attorney’s clients. “Attorneys normally sign (agreements) on their own,” she said.”

By putting that stipulation in the agreement, the judge is giving CPS exactly what it wants-more time to hold on to the children, which has been their goal from the very beginning.

I also found this little tidbit interesting:

Attorney Julie Balovich of Texas RioGrande Legal Aid, which represents many of the families from the FYZ Ranch in Eldorado, told the judge that the message from the higher courts was clear: Walther must vacate her order. Walther disagreed with Balovich’s interpretation… The article goes on to say that Walthers thinks she can only rescind her decision when all the clients sign the agreement.

She wants other people to follow the law, but she does not follow it herself.  That’s a rather odd example to set, isn’t it?

Now CPS has the weekend to move the children even further from parents and say on Monday- when one attorney will return to the 3rd Court of Appeals first thing Monday morning to have Judge Walther’s original seizure order dismissed- that they’re still not sure where all the children are.

Technorati Tags: flds, child custody, control, tyranny, corruption, cps

Powered by ScribeFire.

Only a Dozen

“The state agreed Friday to temporarily reunite a dozen youngsters with their parents in San Antonio but fought to keep hundreds more in foster care while the Texas Supreme Court decides if they were properly removed from their families.”

Only twelve were returned, even though the 3rd court said the way CPS took all of the children was wrong. Why not return all of them? What is so blasted difficult about adhering to the 3rd court’s decision? By ignoring that decision, CPS themselves is breaking the law…again. We now by know that that is their standard operating procedure-breaking the law.

This release does not apply to other families in other cities, and even in this city it took an hour and a half of arguing to get the State to release the children:

“But the Jessops’ attorneys said they had to argue for an hour and a half late Friday afternoon for the release of two of their children when Child Protective Services officials balked at releasing them and even said they couldn’t confirm their whereabouts.

“I just took this little family law case pro bono because I was bored,” Haas said. “I’m not bored any more, but I’m scared.”

By saying they didn’t know where the children were !? CPS was hoping to dissuade the parents and keep the kids. Remember I said before that CPS will do anything to keep the children-here’s my proof.

And their attorney is right-we should all be concerned about what is going on.

The 3rd court’s decision bears repeating:

“The department (CPS) did not present any evidence of danger to the physical health or safety of any male children or any female children who had not reached puberty,” the order by a three-judge panel of the appeals court said in part.”

And if CPS doesn’t know who the mothers are then how could they allow visits in the first place?

“It is undisputed that the Department has allowed these mothers to visit their children. It has participated in status hearing with the parents In other words, the matching of children with parents did not become a problem for the Department until a court decided that it had to give the children back,” they said in their response.”

Exactly. Again more evidence of CPS lies in this case,and who knows how many others?

Technorati Tags: FLDs, child custody, civil liberties, justice

Powered by ScribeFire.

Carnival of Principled Government

This is a monthly carnival. Dana at Principled Discovery has this months’ edition.

Technorati Tags: government, carnivals, principles

Powered by ScribeFire.