"I fight authority, authority always wins
Well I fight authority, authority always winnin'
Well, I been doing it, since I was a young kid
I've come out grinnin'"
You should check the video for this song, there's a lot of "symbolism" in it. It's pretty funny too.
So is this.
Dialogue with: Me. Claude Lamoureux, director of legal services, Batshaw Youth and Family Centers
December 31, 1999 letter to claude lamoureux {lawyer} re: apology and payment of legal fees
January 06, 2000 court appearance
June 19, 2000 court appearance
December 16, 2002 (16:21:01) e-mail to claude lamoureux {director) re: today's court appearance
December 16, 2002 (22:17:15) e-mail receipt from claude lamoureux re: today's court appearance
January 08, 2003 e-mail from claude lamoureux re: today's court appearance
January 09, 2003 (11:37:09) e-mail to claude lamoureux re: december 16 court date
January 09, 2003 (11:41:42) e-mail receipt from claude lamoureux re: december 16 court date
February 19, 2003 e-mail receipt from claude lamoureux re: letter to judge lucille beauchemin
August 28, 2003 letter from claude lamoureux re: your website
Yup, I talk a lot and that's what usually gets me in trouble, but then
again, as that "bald headed, foul mouthed, rangy looking, jerk" that I "present"
myself as, I guess that it is to be expected.
Cool.
In my opinion, the current abuse of the Canadian Charter of Rights and
Freedoms, Civil Code of Quebec, the Quebec Health and Social Services Act,
the Quebec Youth Protection Act, and the Quebec Code of Civil Procedure performed
daily, under the noble auspices of being done in "good faith", "ethically"
and in the children's "best interests" and under that big blanket of "confidentiality"
that some members of Batshaw's legal department like to bury themselves in,
has really got to stop.
Dubious legal tactics, improper legal procedure, intimidation, encroachment
of legal rights, perjury and huge legal fees, are in no way, shape or form
necessary
to help a kid or a "family". Trust me on this.
Aside from my current "perception" of certain members of this "profession"
being accomplices to the perpetrators of some tax-payer funded, socially
destructive, self employment program for "intellects" who have a "distorted", misandrothopic
understanding of social services, youth protection and family, could you
please explain the "benefits" your "associates" have provided
to my family at Society's expense?
Officers of the "Court" that would openly engage in such activities could
only do so with a complete absence of honesty, compassion, or ethics. They would also need the blessing of
their Governing board, the Courts and the Government.
Well, we know that this type of "void" does not exist in our Society, so what's my point?
Well, my point is this:
Is there some place in our Society
that checks up on the "professionals" whom Society "trusts", and bestows upon them the legal "power" and "authority"
to intrude upon a "family" and ride roughshod over the "parents" natural and legal rights, under the nobel auspices of being
done in good faith, ethically and especially in "the children's best interests"?
That was a trick question because everyone who gets involved with the Courts and lawyers in Quebec knows that it's called the "Barreau".
Then I think the Attorney General and the Justice minister for Quebec
might have a say in things too because the Supreme Court of Canada has handed
down judgements that "defines" just how far Society allows State employed
"professionals" to run rampant over a parents natural and legal "rights"
especially when it is been done in the "children's best interests".
As a citizen of this country and province I do have a few questions for
As a "tax-payer":
How much of the "Batshaw Youth and Family Centers"
budget is being spent by this Department, to allow members of this "profession",
the opportunity to "perpetually" employee themselves as their "clients" provide
these types of sub-standard "services" to the English population of
Montreal, in the "children's best interests", honestly and in the spirit of
the "Law".
As the "user":
How much of my family allowance and "parental contribution"
is being spent by this Department, to allow members of this "profession",
the opportunity to "perpetually" employee themselves as their "clients"
provide these types of sub-standard "services" to the English population
of Montreal, in the "children's best interests", honestly and in the spirit
of the "Law".
As the "client": Would you please ask your "client" if they
prefer to resolve the issue of the "social worker" in an "amicable" fashion,
by ceding to the father's "request" that his legal "right" to receive services
from a professional Social Worker as the family's DYP delegate be respected,
or spend 2004 in courts fighting petitions for a request for services from
a "professional" {I'll send you an e-mail when the petition is ready}
'nuff said.
"there's a difference between a human being and being human ...BIG TIME!!!"