One Political Plaza - Home of politics
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main
the most totalitarian institution in the United States
Nov 15, 2013 17:44:27   #
jay-are
 
http://www.stephenbaskerville.net/default/

The divorce regime is the most totalitarian institution ever to arise in the United States, Britain, and the other English-speaking democracies. Its operatives in the family courts and the social service agencies recognize no private sphere of life. "The power of family court judges is almost unlimited," according to Judge Robert Page of the New Jersey family court. "Social workers are perceived to have nearly unlimited power," a San Diego Grand Jury concludes. "Absolute power corrupts absolutely. Total immunity [enjoyed by social workers] is absolute power."

The divorce regime is responsible for much more than "ugly divorces," "nasty custody battles," and other clichés. It is the most serious perpetrator of human and constitutional rights violations in the Western world today. Because it strikes the most basic institution of any civilization – the family – the divorce regime is a threat not only to social order but to civil freedom. It is also almost completely unopposed. No political party and no politicians question it. No journalists investigate it in any depth. A few attorneys have spoken out, but they are eventually suspended or disbarred. Some academics have written about it, but they soon stop. No human rights or civil liberties groups challenge it, and some positively support it. Very few "pro-family" lobbies question it. This is because the divorce regime operates through money, political power, and fear.

The divorce regime is much more serious than simply "unfairness" or "g****r bias" against fathers in custody proceedings. It is the government’s machine for destroying the principal check on its power – the family – and criminalizing its main rival: fathers. The most basic human and constitutional rights are routinely violated in America’s family courts. The lives of children and parents are in serious danger once they are, as the phrase goes, taken into "custody." Systemic conflicts-of-interest among government and private officials charged with child custody, child support, child protection, and connected matters have created a witch hunt against plainly innocent citizens.

The terror of the divorce regime is not a future possibility; it is a present reality. The following methods are currently employed by family courts and other government agents. These practices are now widespread in America:

•mass incarcerations without trial or charge
•forced confessions
•children forcibly separated from parents who are under no suspicion of legal wrongdoing and parents stripped of the care, custody, and companionship of their children without explanation
•government agents entering the homes, demanding and examining private papers and personal effects, and seizing the property of citizens who are under no suspicion of legal wrongdoing
•official court records, including hearing tapes and transcripts, doctored and falsified with the knowledge of court officials and evidence fabricated against the innocent
•defendants denied the constitutional right to face their accusers
•bureaucratic police authorized to issue subpoenas and arrest warrants against parents, with no hearing and contrary to due process of law
•special courts created specifically to process parents for political offenses
•forced labor facilities created specifically for parents
•children instructed to h**e their parents with the backing of government officials
•children forced by government officials to act as informers against their parents
•children abused and k**led with the backing of government officials
•knowingly false allegations, for which no evidence is presented, accepted as fact without proof, overturning the presumption of innocence, and not punished when demonstrated to be untrue
•parents ordered by government officials to separate from their spouses, on pain of losing their children
•parents forced to pay the private fees of court officials they have not hired and whose services they have not sought or used, on pain of incarceration
•parents suspected of no legal wrongdoing punitively stripped of their property and income, sometimes at gunpoint, and reduced to penury
•government officials using the mass media to vilify private American citizens, and political leaders using their offices as platforms to verbally attack private American citizens, who have no right of reply or opportunity to defend themselves
•parents jailed without trial reportedly beaten, in at least one case fatally, and denied medical attention while in police custody.
I have made these charges in some of the most reputable publications in the English language. They have never been refuted. Yet neither have they been corrected or even addressed by public officials, the media, or academics.


Stephen Baskerville
2012

Reply
Nov 16, 2013 01:22:08   #
lpnmajor Loc: Arkansas
 
jay-are wrote:
http://www.stephenbaskerville.net/default/

The divorce regime is the most totalitarian institution ever to arise in the United States, Britain, and the other English-speaking democracies. Its operatives in the family courts and the social service agencies recognize no private sphere of life. "The power of family court judges is almost unlimited," according to Judge Robert Page of the New Jersey family court. "Social workers are perceived to have nearly unlimited power," a San Diego Grand Jury concludes. "Absolute power corrupts absolutely. Total immunity [enjoyed by social workers] is absolute power."

The divorce regime is responsible for much more than "ugly divorces," "nasty custody battles," and other clichés. It is the most serious perpetrator of human and constitutional rights violations in the Western world today. Because it strikes the most basic institution of any civilization – the family – the divorce regime is a threat not only to social order but to civil freedom. It is also almost completely unopposed. No political party and no politicians question it. No journalists investigate it in any depth. A few attorneys have spoken out, but they are eventually suspended or disbarred. Some academics have written about it, but they soon stop. No human rights or civil liberties groups challenge it, and some positively support it. Very few "pro-family" lobbies question it. This is because the divorce regime operates through money, political power, and fear.

The divorce regime is much more serious than simply "unfairness" or "g****r bias" against fathers in custody proceedings. It is the government’s machine for destroying the principal check on its power – the family – and criminalizing its main rival: fathers. The most basic human and constitutional rights are routinely violated in America’s family courts. The lives of children and parents are in serious danger once they are, as the phrase goes, taken into "custody." Systemic conflicts-of-interest among government and private officials charged with child custody, child support, child protection, and connected matters have created a witch hunt against plainly innocent citizens.

The terror of the divorce regime is not a future possibility; it is a present reality. The following methods are currently employed by family courts and other government agents. These practices are now widespread in America:

•mass incarcerations without trial or charge
•forced confessions
•children forcibly separated from parents who are under no suspicion of legal wrongdoing and parents stripped of the care, custody, and companionship of their children without explanation
•government agents entering the homes, demanding and examining private papers and personal effects, and seizing the property of citizens who are under no suspicion of legal wrongdoing
•official court records, including hearing tapes and transcripts, doctored and falsified with the knowledge of court officials and evidence fabricated against the innocent
•defendants denied the constitutional right to face their accusers
•bureaucratic police authorized to issue subpoenas and arrest warrants against parents, with no hearing and contrary to due process of law
•special courts created specifically to process parents for political offenses
•forced labor facilities created specifically for parents
•children instructed to h**e their parents with the backing of government officials
•children forced by government officials to act as informers against their parents
•children abused and k**led with the backing of government officials
•knowingly false allegations, for which no evidence is presented, accepted as fact without proof, overturning the presumption of innocence, and not punished when demonstrated to be untrue
•parents ordered by government officials to separate from their spouses, on pain of losing their children
•parents forced to pay the private fees of court officials they have not hired and whose services they have not sought or used, on pain of incarceration
•parents suspected of no legal wrongdoing punitively stripped of their property and income, sometimes at gunpoint, and reduced to penury
•government officials using the mass media to vilify private American citizens, and political leaders using their offices as platforms to verbally attack private American citizens, who have no right of reply or opportunity to defend themselves
•parents jailed without trial reportedly beaten, in at least one case fatally, and denied medical attention while in police custody.
I have made these charges in some of the most reputable publications in the English language. They have never been refuted. Yet neither have they been corrected or even addressed by public officials, the media, or academics.


Stephen Baskerville
2012
http://www.stephenbaskerville.net/default/ br br ... (show quote)


Did his family have hounds?

Reply
Nov 16, 2013 02:06:42   #
rumitoid
 
Perhaps I should not comment. I am totally unfamiliar with all the points raised by Stephen Baskerville. Yet some of these points, from casual viewing, need explanation and others are obvious given some liberal or conservative leanings. And then some just seem preposterous. It would be good to support any of these points with actual case histories.
Asking for some evidence is not the same as disbelieving what you wrote. Asking for some evidence is not an attempt to tarnish or undermine what you put forth. Asking for some evidence is not an indirect attempt to question the veracity of these points. Asking for some evidence of these many points will, if provided, perfectly drive home your points.

Reply
 
 
Nov 16, 2013 04:25:26   #
AuntiE Loc: 45th Least Free State
 
rumitoid wrote:
Perhaps I should not comment. I am totally unfamiliar with all the points raised by Stephen Baskerville. Yet some of these points, from casual viewing, need explanation and others are obvious given some liberal or conservative leanings. And then some just seem preposterous. It would be good to support any of these points with actual case histories.
Asking for some evidence is not the same as disbelieving what you wrote. Asking for some evidence is not an attempt to tarnish or undermine what you put forth. Asking for some evidence is not an indirect attempt to question the veracity of these points. Asking for some evidence of these many points will, if provided, perfectly drive home your points.
Perhaps I should not comment. I am totally unfamil... (show quote)


Check your mail for a link.

Reply
Nov 16, 2013 11:18:26   #
jlr1827
 
I have been divorced twice. Since Adultry and Alienation of Affection laws were abolished the rate of divorce has skyrocketed, in my opinion. Marriage licences should have an expiration date. I think 2 years would be OK. For $10.00 dollars renewal fee, both parties show up in person. With proper ID.

Reply
Nov 16, 2013 11:36:25   #
jlr1827
 
Rumitoid,
Well said. It seems you have 100% lack of experience. For those of us with experience, no explanation is necessary. For those without experience, no explanation is possible.

Reply
Nov 16, 2013 19:52:21   #
votenoobama Loc: Texas
 
She reported my neighbor little girl had been abused. The Police showed up at 10pm they did not even knock on the door or try to open it, the police just knock it down. Joe was not their because, he was working. Cps showed up and took the little girl without even talking to the mother. I tried to help but, the police just shoved a M-16 in my face and told me if I had any sense at all I would stay inside my house. I back off but stayed out in my front yard. They was a lot of screaming and crying from Mary and her child, the child was screaming, howled and kicking as CPS through her in the back seat and there were 2 ladies waiting for them, they slam the cars back door and the other 2 got in the front seat and sped off. The police handcuff Mary and took her to jail, two police officers stay inside the house and two more removed the police cars around the corner waiting on Joe, he gets off work at 11pm and had no clue what has happen to is family. I watch as Joe pull into his driveway. Two police cars pull in behind his car and two other police officers shot out of the house, they did even say anything to Joe they slam him on his car with one police officer grab the back of Joes hair and slam his face into the car's hood. They handcuff Joe, he was asking what he did and the Police said you know what you did. Joe and Mary was in Jail for three weeks before they were able to post bail.
To make a long story short. After 5 years they finally got their little girl back home and all charges were drop. Everybody finally figure out that what the School teacher said, was not TRUE or she miss understood what the little girl said. Joe said he had to cash in his and his wife retirement and get a second mortgage on their home and had to barrow $150,000.00 dollars from family members. As Joe said we are broke.

Reply
 
 
Nov 18, 2013 16:11:25   #
jay-are
 
rumitoid wrote:
Perhaps I should not comment. I am totally unfamiliar with all the points raised by Stephen Baskerville. Yet some of these points, from casual viewing, need explanation and others are obvious given some liberal or conservative leanings. And then some just seem preposterous. It would be good to support any of these points with actual case histories.
Asking for some evidence is not the same as disbelieving what you wrote. Asking for some evidence is not an attempt to tarnish or undermine what you put forth. Asking for some evidence is not an indirect attempt to question the veracity of these points. Asking for some evidence of these many points will, if provided, perfectly drive home your points.
Perhaps I should not comment. I am totally unfamil... (show quote)


Read the book, "Taken into Custody." I personally vouch for the veracity of the stories in that book. The book describes exactly what happened to me.

Made up false accusations assumed to be true. Presumed guilty, with no evidence, no proof. Took the kids and the house, with no probable cause of anything. Forced to use all my retirement and savings to pay bills that wife ran up. She got 100% of the property, and I got 100% of the debt, there was no 50/50 split of anything. Time in jail for paying support directly to wife instead of to the state. etc. etc. Basically total destruction of family, for no other reason than to destroy a family. Made no attempt to save the family.

Reply
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main
OnePoliticalPlaza.com - Forum
Copyright 2012-2024 IDF International Technologies, Inc.