The Child Protector Agenda
To Control Your Children
Copyright © 1998 By Ray Thomas There has been a big upsurge recently in the number of stories in the news about "parents who abuse their children." This fits with the well known (to those of us who pay attention) Hegelian Principle looters (also known as: collectivists, socialists, liberals) use when trying to put over a con: get their media friends to push the con every day in the news.
Using the "Hegelian Principle" involves three steps:
Step one: Create a problem: Or call attention to something you can con the public into believing is a problem;
Step two: Publicize "the problem": Make use of every propaganda method known to man to condition the public to believe there is a problem;
Step three: Offer a "solution": One that takes away one (more) "small" right (But hey -- you can afford to give up that "itty-bitty right" in order to "solve the problem," can't you?).
CONTROLLING OUR CHILDREN The power brokers are now at "stage two" in their campaign to take control, not only of what our kids are taught in school (they've already got that), but control over all decisions that are made about them. They want to completely discredit parents by convincing everybody -- including other parents (Present company excepted, don'tcha know.) -- that the biggest majority of parents abuse their children, so the government should take over all parenting decisions ("There's a 'problem,' so you should be willing to give up your parental rights in order to solve it.").
YOU NOW MUST ASK FOR A BUREAUCRAT'S "PERMISSION" You still get to do the work, but now you have to ask a bureaucrat for "permission" to do whatever must be done (If you are a child molester or abuser, you'll still get to molest or abuse them, but the bureaucrats won't care. They'll have "the power" to control your kids, and your actions toward them. Their biggest "concern" will be that you obey their "regulations." Not whether or not you abuse the kids.).
FEED THE GULLIBLE PRESS In "phase two," they constantly feed the gullible press item after item about "parental child abuse," many of them items that would never have been seen outside of local papers, and not there either, for the most part. The press predictably (and without checking the facts, as usual) repeats the "mantra" over and over, every time they are asked to do so. A good example is the Associated Press item seen in June, 1996 (nationally) about a Winchester, Indiana man who was arrested because his three-year-old boy was seen drinking beer and smoking a cigarette (Wow! Three of their pet projects in one incident!). Now I'm not saying it's OK to allow a three-year-old to smoke and drink, but I am saying that you'd never see such an item in an Associated Press national dispatch as a rule. That's "local news."
HIT IT EVERY DAY The pattern, under phase two, is to have one or more items that "fan the flames" appear in the media every day, in as many news venues as possible, while constantly criticizing "child abusers" in other items, and calling for "tougher laws." Pretty soon the incessant din has to have an affect on the people and then others start joining in the calls for tougher laws. Then it's time to start pushing phase three in a big way.
PHASE THREE Phase three involves organizing such things as "Children's Rights Marches," where "abused children" are paraded before the news media and the world, while their "plight" is emphasized.
"CHILDREN'S RIGHTS" Then they trot out the "studies" and arrange conferences to "study" things that ought to be done to "alleviate the problem." Child abuse becomes an election-year issue. Then the president chimes in and makes empty statements. Pretty soon they're arranging a "photo op" with the president and a "group of abused children," and everything else they can think of to "stir the pot." All the bureaucrats who make their livings by controlling what parents may do regarding their children will be there to protect and promote their interests.
A REEEEEALLY BAD CASE Naturally, at about this time they pick an especially bad case to publicize, such as the Denver ten-year-old who (supposedly) kicked a baby to death because his dad didn't keep his house clean. Or the one where an eight-year-old broke into a home to rob it because his parents abused him, so he beat another infant almost to death. There is always such a case ready for the looters to exploit because their welfare policies have created an atmosphere in which such cases abound. When kids have nothing to do, and their parents are drug addicts and criminals because they had nothing to do when they were children, it's almost a "normal thing" for the kids to do violence.
STEP ONE: CREATE A PROBLEM The fact that the looters in fact created this problem seems to be lost on everybody who insists that the looters should be placed in power over the children.
RECOVERED MEMORIES Then there are the stories of "recovered memories" of abuse that are used by the "Family Service" Gestapo to put parents in jail -- never mind that a large number of such cases have been proven to involve planted, rather than "recovered" memories. Mind you, I'm not saying "recovered memories" don't exist. I'm sure people do forget things that are too awful to remember. What I am saying is that these "recovered memories" should never be used as evidence of a crime without convincing corroborating evidence as has been done in many cases.
MONEY AND POWER Distinguished professor/syndicated columnist Thomas Sowell said in a recent column: "Make no mistake about it, those who organized this political pageant (The 'Rally for Children' (the 'Million Man March for Kids') held in Washington, DC in early 1996) were doing so on their own behalf -- for money and power -- and children were just pawns in the game."
SINCERE -- BUT DELUDED He also said in the same article: "No doubt that many -- perhaps most of those gathered in front of the Lincoln Memorial were sincere. Savvy leaders often surround themselves with 'useful idiots' who actually believe the propaganda. These leaders also know that no one makes better hostages, to march across the political minefields in front of them, than children." (Emphasis mine -RT)
NOT MONEY: POWER He also pointed out that what they want is "-- not just money, but power; the power to take over the role of parents, without having to take the responsibility for the consequences. That this has been the agenda of groups like the Children's Defense Fund since long before this rally was planned or held, specifically to promote the theme of "collectivism" in the raising of children that will end up with the collectivists completely in the driver's seat.
"To the 'anointed,' other people's children are guinea pigs for social experiments and targets for brainwashing in politically correct views and attitudes. Lots of statistics were thrown around at the Washington rally, showing how many children were in poverty, abused or otherwise getting a bad start in life. It never seemed to occur to any of those present that the kinds of people and the kinds of policies represented at this rally are themselves a major part or the problem." And he asks: "What has gotten better (in the last 30 years) as a result (of liberal control and growing welfare state programs usurping parental control and all sorts of avant-garde theories about how to raise children) as a result? But they just keep on pushing and people (many of them children) just keep on suffering and even dying."
UNSUPPORTED CHARGES Most cases of child abuse are raised and prosecuted with little more evidence than the unsupported (by physical evidence) word of a child, a parent (often one who benefits by making the charge), or by an outsider who may have misinterpreted what he or she saw. In no other area of law are people allowed to be sent to jail on such little, or nonexistent evidence. Independent corroboration is always required, except in child abuse cases. Child courts are much like the courts landlords use in eviction cases. When the eviction is filed, you're as good as gone because the deck is stacked in their favor. Here, when the abuse charge is filed (and sometimes when it is not), your kids are as good as gone.
CASE STUDY Michael Thomas, of Denver, Colorado. Yes, we are related, He is my son. Which is why I have so much personal knowledge of his case. But lest anyone accuse me of lying because of this, or of "looking at it through rose colored glasses," I ask, no demand that if anyone can come up with proof that will stand up in court that any of the accusations made against him are true, I will back off. Michael Thomas, who does not drink, smoke, or do drugs (and after 18 years as a paramedic, scraping the remains of drug addicts and drunks off the streets, I would know), and whom I've never known to abuse his children (and he has lived with me and I him on several occasions), was accused (by his then soon-to-be ex-wife) of beating his kids, starving them, and allowing them to live in filthy surroundings. He has been accused of threatening his wife with a gun and of throwing her up against the wall in anger.
Let's take the gun. Mike is an armed security officer and thus has occasion to carry a gun. Which means that a gun will probably be in the house at any given time, leading to the possibility that a girl who would rather tell a lie than tell the truth, even when the truth would serve better, would accuse him of threatening her with a gun after a heated argument. This girl (girl, not woman) is a congenital liar, an inveterate thief (I was forced to put a lock on my door when they lived with me), a snooper who sticks her nose into everybody else's belongings and who just steals whatever she wants. She is a person who, when she finishes with some trash, just opens her hand and lets it drop to the floor (and that includes such things as dirty diapers (whenever she can be forced into changing one) and partly empty potato chip wrappers, which she has been known to drop on the floor and leave until the potato chips were ground into the carpet. She is also well-known to have regularly cheated on him, with both male and female lovers. This is not suspected, it is known. But it makes no difference to this court. This, and all the other things I have noted here are from personal knowledge, having come from close association with both of them for long periods of time.
ACCUSATIONS BELIEVED IMMEDIATELY Yet when she made accusations against him when they separated (mostly because of what I just enumerated), she was instantly believed, in spite of the fact that as this is written, she is reported to have green hair in a spike hairdo, to be living with a truck driver in his car somewhere in the outback of Colorado, and is rarely seen on child visitation day (did not see them for six months, while Mike was there every week).
A PRODUCT OF HER UPBRINGING This is a girl who begged for Mike's (and my) help some years ago when her alcoholic mother was abusing her when she was still a teenager. Who (the mother), when Mike worked to help her become an "emancipated minor," cut the tires on his car and are now trying to get custody of his children (More revenge, perhaps?) even though the children's mother seems to have lost interest. A mother who went to their school while the children were in Mike's custody and spirited them away without his knowledge so she could abandon them. Who tried to get the bureaucrats to take them, then the police (neither of which would do so without a court order), and finally the court (where she succeeded finally getting a court order to put them into the custody of the authorities, thereby playing right into their hands).
She ended up turning them over to their court-appointed attorney at a 7-Eleven store and disappearing for six months (It is my theory that her parents put her up to this so they could get their further revenge on Mike by taking custody away from him, either temporarily or permanently. Mike has not been proven to be an unfit parent in any way).
A CRIMINAL SENTENCE Notwithstanding the fact that this entire "case" is nothing but her unsupported word and that not a single bit of actual evidence exists that he was either abusive to her or to the children -- and he was never even charged with a crime -- they forced Mike to attend the "Amend Program" sessions that most people are only required to attend under the threat of jail time (To everyone's surprise, however, he enjoyed the sessions, saying that he thought he had learned a lot about interpersonal relationships).
THEY'LL USE ANY SITUATION The "Child Protective Services," (under whatever alias they use) will do just about anything to gain control over our children and "take the patents out of the loop." Their very funding depends upon how many children they can take away from parents, for however short a time they can accomplish it. The longer, the better. And if they can take them away permanently, so much the better. They get (at this time) $4,000 for each child they can "terminate" from the parents and put up for adoption.
THEY MUST BE STOPPED If we don't do something to stop them, pretty soon none of us will have any say about our children and what they do. I am not, by any means saying there should be no laws, and no child protection. But I am saying they should be made to prove their allegations before a conviction can be obtained and before the parent can be discredited.
THEY'RE "OUT OF CONTROL" Child Protective agents are allowed to do too much, with not enough control over them. They are plainly out of control, (See Special Report #35, "School Officials Rape Children") and if we don't do something to "rein them in," no one will be able to make any decision regarding his or her own children without having to consult some bureaucrat to get permission.
JUST ONE MORE EXAMPLE This is just one more example of the "power grab" that continues unabated within the government at all levels. They've got such cons going all over the map, and it's hard to even know about them all, let alone stop them.
IT'S NOT ABOUT CHILDREN'S RIGHTS It's not about children's rights. It's not about guns, or about smoking, or about wetlands or the environment. It's about power, and their ability to wield it over you and I. They only take our money in taxes because that gives them the (seed) money to finance their cons. You don't need to own the money if you control absolutely how it is spent. Power is everything to the looters, and they'll do anything they have to do to get more of it. Lie, cheat, steal, even destroy families and abuse the very children they're supposed to be protecting.
This is a Special Report by the publisher of "Beyond Common Sense," a FREE web site based online newsletter. You may read the current issue now by going to: https://www.angelfire.com/co2/beyondcommonsense.
You may subscribe to the Announcement List that tells you when a new issue comes out by clicking on this link and following the directions. It will alert you to many of the power seeker scams in and out of the child protector arena. With the overview this newsletter gives you, you will be better able to understand the reasoning behind the power seeker scam to take over your child and his/her education.
HOME