Wednesday, July 26, 2017

Zoe's Ark: There Are No Blurred Lines Between Humanitarian Aid And Exploitation

In the following video, one can witness H.A. Goodman, visibly unnerved in the reading of the article I have provided, below.

The piece is on international adoptions, or, what I prefer to call it, human trafficking.

Political pundits refuse to speak upon the U.S. Child Welfare System, and understandably why: I am the only source and it operates under a legal cloak of secrecy.


With all due respect, political pundits are also into self-promotion, a career sustainable action, but I am in this game as an original source...on a mission.



There are no blurred lines between humanitarian aid and exploitation because it is nothing but the residuals of the peculiar institution, another subject no one wishes to discuss, or rather understand that it only applies to "The Poors" (always said with clinched teeth) and it is done, as the good christian (yes, I intentionally used a lower case "c") thing to do, in the name of the tax exempt God.


"It takes a village...then pillages the treasury."

Zoe’s Ark And The Blurred Lines Between Humanitarian Aid And Exploitation

Where is the line between humanitarian aid and exploitation?

Cases like the Zoe’s Ark scandal, the Silsby scandal, and others provide a troubling picture of war torn or disaster stricken areas creating situations ripe for abuse by NGO’s and other “charitable” groups that severely lack public or governmental accountability. These cases raise the question of transparency in aid work, and suggest that issues in this area have been ongoing in different regions for some time.

To get an idea of how relevant this issue currently is, Russia Today published an article yesterday revealing that more than 100 missing refugee children in Calais may have become victims of sex trafficking. Julian Assange has also questioned the legitimacy of Bono’s “One” foundation, calling it a “special ops match made in heaven.” Elizabeth Lee Beck, a Yale-educated litigator in the DNC Fraud Lawsuit, appeared in a bombshell interview with alternative media website Infowars, where she referenced issues that had come up in her research in regards to the death of Peter Smith, Beranton Whisenant and others. Given these developments, it is especially timely to take a closer look at scandals like Zoe’s Ark and ask why, after over a decade, the issues stemming from such cases have not been fully addressed.

The 2007 Zoe’s Ark scandal was one of the first of a string of NGO related cases of misconduct which resulted in accusations from the President of Chad that the NGO had been intending to sell the children to human trafficking and organ trafficking networks. Despite the members of the charity receiving convictions on charges of child trafficking, and receiving sentences of eight years hard labor, the accused were repatriated to France after the intercession of Nicholas Sarkozy. Sarkozy personally persuaded Idriss Deby to give the offenders Presidential pardons. The group later faced related charges in France.

Where is the line between humanitarian aid and exploitation? Cases like the Zoe’s Ark scandal, the Silsby scandal, and others provide a troubling picture of war torn or disaster stricken areas creating situations ripe for abuse by NGO’s and other “charitable” groups that severely lack public or governmental accountability. These cases raise the question of transparency in aid work, and suggest that issues in this area have been ongoing in different regions for some time.

To get an idea of how relevant this issue currently is, Russia Today published an article yesterday revealing that more than 100 missing refugee children in Calais may have become victims of sex trafficking. Julian Assange has also questioned the legitimacy of Bono’s “One” foundation, calling it a “special ops match made in heaven.” Elizabeth Lee Beck, a Yale-educated litigator in the DNC Fraud Lawsuit, appeared in a bombshell interview with alternative media website Infowars, where she referenced issues that had come up in her research in regards to the death of Peter Smith, Beranton Whisenant and others. Given these developments, it is especially timely to take a closer look at scandals like Zoe’s Ark and ask why, after over a decade, the issues stemming from such cases have not been fully addressed.

The 2007 Zoe’s Ark scandal was one of the first of a string of NGO related cases of misconduct which resulted in accusations from the President of Chad that the NGO had been intending to sell the children to human trafficking and organ trafficking networks. Despite the members of the charity receiving convictions on charges of child trafficking, and receiving sentences of eight years hard labor, the accused were repatriated to France after the intercession of Nicholas Sarkozy. Sarkozy personally persuaded Idriss Deby to give the offenders Presidential pardons. The group later faced related charges in France.

Charity involvement in child and organ trafficking is a concerning issue; these concerns were repeated in 2010, this time in Haiti with the Laura Silsby child debacle. The accusations mirrored similar comments made by the Prime Minister of Haiti in an interview with CNN where he accused American NGOs of removing children for the express purpose of selling them to pedophilia and organ trafficking rings. Former French Minister of Foreign and European Affairs and founder of Médecins Sans Frontières Bernard Kouchner bridges these cases in some respects, and casts additional light on the concerning lack of transparency that NGO’s enjoy and the corruption that has consistently resulted in these chaotic conditions.


Zoe’s Ark, also known as L’Arche de Zoe and Children Rescue, was registered as an NGO with the French government in 2004 in the wake of the Asian Tsunami. The charity’s leader, Eric Breteau, soon turned the group’s attention towards conflict in Darfur. The 2007 incident that resulted became infamous when it was revealed that members of the organization including its founder had intended to sell the children for thousands of Euros to French families.

The BBC reported that the children recovered from Zoe’s Ark were healthy, specifying that the children were not being treated for any serious illnesses or injuries. According to NBC News, Zoe’s Ark workers had presented the children as ill and injured by applying bandages to non-existant wounds. This suggested that Zoe’s Ark had intentionally faked injuries on the bodies of healthy children, possibly to hide their identity and origin.

Furor was heightened when it emerged that most of the children recovered from Zoe’s Ark  originated from areas not involved in the Darfur conflict. The vast majority of those children were between the ages of three and five years old, with several infants. Zoe’s Ark described their motivations as altruistic, despite admitting that they had planned to circumvent African and European adoption laws in order to remove the children. That the charity would take children with living relatives from a location that was not involved in the Darfur conflict, then intentionally create an appearance of injuries in order to further misconstrue the children’s origin, is deeply disturbing and raises concerns regarding the NGO’s intentions.

Outrage surrounding the scandal intensified when it was revealed that the 103 children recovered from the charity represented only a tiny fraction of the total number the charity planned to remove under such controversial circumstances. According to the Berkley Center for Peace, Religion and World Affairs, Zoe’s Ark had intended to remove as many as 10,000 children from the area during the single operation in Chad. The wealth that Zoe’s Ark would have gained from removing ten thousand such children is truly mind boggling to contemplate. French citizens were reported to have been prepared to pay thousands of Euros (up to $11,000) per child.

Six Zoe’s Ark workers were charged with acting illegally as an adoption intermediary, facilitating illegal entry into France, and fraud in regard to hundreds of families who had expected to adopt children. Despite receiving Presidential pardons in Chad, members of the charity were eventually convicted on related charges in France. During these French proceedings, Zoe’s Ark leader Eric Breteau was described by a witness as a “powerful manipulator.”

Zoe’s Ark, also known as L’Arche de Zoe and Children Rescue, was registered as an NGO with the French government in 2004 in the wake of the Asian Tsunami. The charity’s leader, Eric Breteau, soon turned the group’s attention towards conflict in Darfur. The 2007 incident that resulted became infamous when it was revealed that members of the organization including its founder had intended to sell the children for thousands of Euros to French families.

The BBC reported that the children recovered from Zoe’s Ark were healthy, specifying that the children were not being treated for any serious illnesses or injuries. According to NBC News, Zoe’s Ark workers had presented the children as ill and injured by applying bandages to non-existant wounds. This suggested that Zoe’s Ark had intentionally faked injuries on the bodies of healthy children, possibly to hide their identity and origin.

Furor was heightened when it emerged that most of the children recovered from Zoe’s Ark  originated from areas not involved in the Darfur conflict. The vast majority of those children were between the ages of three and five years old, with several infants. Zoe’s Ark described their motivations as altruistic, despite admitting that they had planned to circumvent African and European adoption laws in order to remove the children. That the charity would take children with living relatives from a location that was not involved in the Darfur conflict, then intentionally create an appearance of injuries in order to further misconstrue the children’s origin, is deeply disturbing and raises concerns regarding the NGO’s intentions.

Outrage surrounding the scandal intensified when it was revealed that the 103 children recovered from the charity represented only a tiny fraction of the total number the charity planned to remove under such controversial circumstances. According to the Berkley Center for Peace, Religion and World Affairs, Zoe’s Ark had intended to remove as many as 10,000 children from the area during the single operation in Chad. The wealth that Zoe’s Ark would have gained from removing ten thousand such children is truly mind boggling to contemplate. French citizens were reported to have been prepared to pay charged with acting illegally as an adoption intermediary, facilitating illegal entry into France, and fraud in regard to hundreds of families who had expected to adopt children. Despite receiving Presidential pardons in Chad, members of the charity were eventually convicted on related charges in France. During these French proceedings, Zoe’s Ark leader Eric Breteau was described by a witness as a “powerful manipulator.”


Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

CONYERS Condemns Senate Vote To Start Obamacare Repeal Process


Washington, D.C. – Congressman John Conyers, Jr. (MI-13) released the following statement after Senate Republicans voted to start debate on repealing the Affordable Care Act:

Dean of the U.S. House
of Representatives
John Conyers, Jr.
“I’m horrified by what today’s vote means for poor and working people in this country. The Affordable Care Act is not perfect and I have said this many times. However, in Detroit alone, the uninsured rate has dropped from 22% to 7.4% over the last 3 years. That progress will be undone by today’s vote.

“The proposals that Republicans have on the table will result in more than 50,000 people in my district losing coverage. Nationwide, premiums will skyrocket for those lucky enough to have insurance and Medicaid will be cut by 1/3 - meaning that people will likely die. I don’t say that to be hyperbolic; it’s simply a fact that lack of access to care results in preventable deaths.

“Today’s vote makes clear what I’ve been saying for decades: the only way forward is through a single, national insurance plan: Medicare for All. Virtually every other advanced country on earth uses a government guaranteed model rather than relying on employer-sponsored care through a for-profit insurance industry. These countries spend 30-60% less than we do, with longer life-expectancy and lower infant and maternal mortality rates. We are the richest country on earth. It is a moral failure that we lag so far behind the rest of the world on healthcare. When Democrats regain control of Congress and the White House, it is essential that we invest in Medicare expansion and extend it to every American.”

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Tuesday, July 25, 2017

CONYERS: An unchecked presidency is a danger to the Republic

By: Reps. John Conyers and Elijah Cummings 

Dean of the U.S. House
of Representatives
John Conyers, Jr.
On Saturday, Oct. 20, 1973, President Richard Nixon fired Special Prosecutor Archibald Cox because he refused to back down from his pursuit of the Watergate tapes.

Nearly a half century later, President Donald Trump fired FBI Director James Comey because of, in the president’s own words, “this Russia thing with Trump and Russia.”

And Wednesday, the president complained about Attorney General Jeff Sessions’ decision to recuse himself from the Russia investigation; Mr. Trump said he “would have picked someone else” to run the Department of Justice had he known that was coming.

 How Congress responds to moments like these matters.

The differences between Congress’ response in 1973 and our response today are stark — and, frankly, disappointing.

In 1973, the House Judiciary Committee had a serious and bipartisan response, subpoenaing and eventually releasing the Watergate tapes.

The current Republican response has been tepid at best; they have not issued a single subpoena to the White House, and Speaker Paul Ryan defended Mr. Trump’s interference in the Russia investigation by assuring us that “he’s just new to this.”

 As the senior Democrats on the House Judiciary and Oversight and Government Reform committees, we believe it is critical that Special Counsel Robert Mueller be given the independence, time and resources to conduct a thorough investigation and report his findings to Congress.

At the same time, as a co-equal branch of government, Congress must fulfill its constitutional duty to investigate the full range of Trump administration and Trump campaign actions.

 Successful congressional investigations develop a comprehensive, fact-based record to form the basis for further action.

The House and Senate Watergate investigations led to Nixon’s resignation and adoption of the Ethics in Government Act. It was serious, deliberative, bipartisan, transparent and operated in parallel to law enforcement investigations. In the absence of any meaningful investigation by House Republicans, Democratic members have sent requests for information on our own.

Our efforts have been met with months of stonewalling.

The Trump White House recently told government agencies “not to cooperate [with any oversight] requests from Democrats,” and issued a contrived Justice Department legal opinion that such queries are “not properly considered to be oversight requests.”

 We will continue to press for answers because the information we seek goes to the central question of the Trump presidency: Is the administration acting in the public interest, or merely to benefit the private interests of President Trump?

 And because our requests have been largely ignored by the administration and the GOP — including the chairs of our own committees — we have been forced to utilize alternative means of accountability.

 For example, more than 200 members of Congress have filed a lawsuit to force the president to comply with the Constitution’s Foreign Emoluments Clause. Oversight Committee Democrats are attempting to use their special statutory authority to obtain information from the General Services Administration about the lease of the Trump International Hotel to the president.

Together, our committee Democrats have asked the inspector general of the Department of Justice to investigate whether Attorney General Jeff Sessions violated the terms of his recusal when he participated in the decision to fire Director Comey.

 Democrats have also demanded up or down votes where critical oversight requests have been denied.

The House has voted on 10 privileged resolutions — each one defeated by the Republicans — to obtain copies of the president’s tax returns.

Democrats are introducing 12 separate resolutions of inquiry in six committees seeking information on matters ranging from possible obstruction of justice, to the president’s foreign entanglements, to abuse of power.

And Democrats have filed a discharge petition asking every Member of the House to go on record as to whether they support an independent bipartisan commission to examine foreign intervention in our elections.

 An unchecked presidency — such as that of Richard Nixon or Donald Trump — represents a clear and present danger to the Republic.

We have taken this series of steps in an attempt to provide at least a measure of independent scrutiny and to mark how Republicans in Congress have repeatedly failed in this responsibility.

We do not have the right to remain silent.

Our investigations must continue separate from, and in addition to, the special counsel’s work.

 The next constitutional crisis — the firing of Special Counsel Mueller, perhaps — is not hard to envision.

Mr. Trump has already characterized the Russia investigation as “the single greatest witch hunt in American history,” being “led by some very bad and conflicted people,” and warned Mr. Mueller not to expand the investigation into his family’s finances beyond Russia.

 In recent days, we have seen evidence of the willingness by Donald Trump Jr. and others in the Trump campaign to obtain information damaging to Hillary Clinton from the Russian government — information that is as probative to Mr. Mueller’s investigation as it is threatening to the president.

Congress must ensure that Mr. Mueller can continue his investigation independently, effectively, and steadfastly.

Should Mr. Mueller be fired, the current majority must understand they have a duty to enforce our system of checks and balances — as we did in 1973. c

If Republicans cannot appreciate that obligation, then the American people will be forced to decide whether they really want a Congress that continues to ignore its responsibility.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

CONYERS: Statement for the Hearing on H.R. 2887, the No Regulation Without Representation Act of 2017


Dean of the U.S. House
of Representatives
John Conyers, Jr.
Before I begin my remarks, I’d like to take a moment to recognize Joseph Ehrenkrantz for his dedicated service to the House of Representatives.

Over the past two years, he has diligently served the House Judiciary Committee as a Professional Staff Member.

Joe began his career with the House Judiciary Committee Democrats shortly after graduation, and has worked tirelessly on issues of civil rights, state and local taxation, and voting rights ever since.

Joe has served the Members and staff of the Committee with great energy and enthusiasm, working to ensure the smooth functioning of Committee business by coordinating briefings, staffing hearings, and clerking markups.

We thank Joe for his many outstanding contributions to the House Judiciary Committee and the U.S. House of Representatives, and wish him well as he begins law school at Georgetown University this fall.

He will surely be missed.

Turning to today’s hearing, which focuses on H.R. 2887, the “No Regulation Without Representation Act of 2017,” it appears that supporters of this legislation intend to address the apparent problem of states regulating beyond their borders.

Twenty-five years ago, the Supreme Court in Quill held that a state may require a business to remit a sales tax only if such business had a physical presence in the state where the goods or services are provided. 

In an effort to respond to this holding, various legislative responses have been introduced over the years, including two of which I strongly supported, namely, The Remote Transactions Parity Act and the Marketplace Fairness Act. 

Although one of these bipartisan measures overwhelmingly passed the Senate in 2013, our Committee has unfortunately failed to consider either of these bills. 

Instead, we are focusing today on H.R. 2887, a highly-flawed measure. 

Among its many flaws, this bill would eviscerate the 10th Amendment and override the powers of all 50 states by expanding the physical presence standard to all taxes and all regulations.

H.R. 2887 represents an extreme rethinking of the constitutional role of states in our Nation and would strip essential consumer protection powers and taxing authority from all 50 states.

To quote the bipartisan National Governors Association and the National Conference of State Legislatures, this legislation “is a direct threat to representative self-government.”

Simply put, H.R. 2887 would preempt tens of thousands of state laws and saddle these states with untenable budget constraints by reducing their ability to collect tax revenues.
Second, this bill appears to ignore the real problems that main street retailers face today.

Local retailers—that have to collect sales taxes—are desperately struggling to compete with the reduced prices and conveniences offered by remote Internet sellers, whose online prices are generally lower because many consumers do not pay any sales taxes and thereby can save upwards of 10% or more on the purchase price of these items.

Technological advancements have made it easier for consumers to take advantage of this disparity and the consequences of this loophole are becoming increasingly more apparent.

Since October, at least 10 major, nationwide brick and mortar retailers have filed for bankruptcy and more than 90,000 workers have been laid off. 

Retail sector growth is at its weakest since the Great Recession, and recent projections estimate that a quarter of all U.S. shopping malls will close in the next five years.

Without question, I am a strong supporter of competition, especially when it benefits consumers and encourages innovation. Nevertheless, competitors should compete on things other than sales tax policy.

We should ensure parity at the point of sale among retailers and level the playing field.

Finally, H.R. 2887, by codifying Quill, would effectively prevent states and local governments from accessing a substantial part of their tax base.

State governments rely on sales and use taxes for nearly one third of their total tax revenue. Yet, as more Americans purchase more of their goods on the internet, the states receive less in sales tax revenue.

We owe it to our local communities and local retailers, as well as state and local governments, to take up helpful legislation rather than considering such flawed measures as H.R. 2887.  Accordingly, I urge Committee Chairman Goodlatte and Subcommittee Chairman Marino to instead consider H.R. 2193, the “Remote Transaction Parity Act,” bipartisan legislation introduced by Representative Kristi Noem earlier this year.

In closing, I look forward to hearing the testimony from our witnesses today and yield back the balance of my time.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

CONYERS, SANFORD & COHEN Host Bipartisan Forum On Press Freedom



Forum on “The State of Press Freedom in 21st Century America”



Washington, D.C. – On Monday, July 24, 2017 at 3:00 p.m., House Judiciary Committee Ranking Member John Conyers, Jr. (D-MI), Representatives Steve Cohen (D-TN) and Mark Sanford (R-SC), hosted a bipartisan forum on freedom of the press entitled, “The State of Press Freedom in 21st Century America.”

The First Amendment to the United States Constitution provides, among other things, that “Congress shall make no law . . . abridging the freedom . . . of the press . . . .”  A free press is a critical check on the power of government institutions and public officials, yet press freedom may be under threat from various sources. 

The forum will explore, among other topics, the following:

         President Donald Trump’s repeated attempts to seemingly de-legitimize mainstream news outlets by calling them “fake news” and “the enemy of the American people;”
         Threats by President Trump to change libel laws to make it easier to pursue lawsuits against the press;
         Aggressive efforts by the Administrations of Presidents Barack Obama and George W. Bush to prosecute or pressure journalists;
         The potential epidemic of misinformation being presented to the public as “news” that may threaten to undermine the credibility of legitimate journalism;
         Restrictions on access to press briefings; and
         Physical threats to journalists.

                    Members of Congress

         Subcommittee on the Constitution and Civil Justice Ranking Member Steve Cohen (D-TN)
         Representative Mark Sanford (R-SC)
         House Judiciary Committee Ranking Member John Conyers, Jr. (D-MI)
         Additional Members of Congress

Panelists

         Jeff Ballou, President, National Press Club
         Jennifer Rubin, Writer of the “Right Turn” Blog, Washington Post
         Kyle Pope, Editor-in-Chief, Columbia Journalism Review
         Alicia Shepard, Media ethics expert and contributing writer for USA Today
         Floyd Abrams, Senior Counsel, Cahill, Gordon & Reindel LLP
         Rick Blum, Executive Director, News Media for Open Government
         Marvin Kalb, Senior Adviser, Pulitzer Center on Crisis Reporting, Harvard Professor Emeritus, and Senior Fellow at Brookings Institution


Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Lalanea Little-Tobeler Was Arrested For Exposing Fraud In Michigan Child Welfare On Social Media

Lala was arrested.

The police did not have a warrant.

The police said she threatened a judge on social media.

The judge is up for re-election.

Here are the links to the threats:

Lalanea Little-Tobeler Has An Issue With The Michigan Child Welfare System 




Stay tuned for updates and a formal introduction of the judge, his re-election campaign and why judges in Michigan can get away with arresting parents of kids who were legally kidnapped for exercising their civil rights to speak out about human trafficking and Medicaid fraud in child welfare.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Monday, July 24, 2017

Two CPS Workers Walk Into A Bar...

Image result for two girls doing shots
Michigan Catholic Charities Foster Care Workers Doing Case Planning
Two Michigan CPS workers walk into a bar, have a beer, and leave the case files on the bar to have a smoke.

Ms. Walberer reported as she and Ms. DeBoer continued to talk, she placed the menu over the report sitting at the bar counter. She and Ms. DeBoer decided to go outside to smoke. Ms. Walberer explained how she spoke with the bartender to make sure they could leave their pitcher of beer on the counter while they went outside to smoke. The bartender allowed them to as long as they were not gone long. Ms. Walberer reports she left Rockwell’s and went down the block to her car to get her cigarettes. She reported she went back into the bar after approximately 20 minutes and paid her bill when she saw one of the parent agency treatment plans still sitting at the bar, but the rest of the report was not.
Please note, no one was fired in this incident, but the kid stayed in foster care.
Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Sunday, July 23, 2017

Trust Funds Tales of Child Welfare Fraud: Shirley Temple, Jackie Coogan, Hillary Clinton & UNICEF

Gather around, my dear children, for the Celestial Goddess is about to tell the tale about the origins of child welfare fraud, the greatest fraud known to the history of human existence.

It all begins with the 13th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, where most people fail to understand that "slavery" was never abolished because it forgot about chattel law.

In the reading of Section one, it clearly states that servitude is still a valid practice as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted.
Section 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.
Now, mind you, it did not specify two key items with the first being whether the crime is an administrative or judicial conviction.

In child protection proceedings, poverty is the crime of abuse and neglect, "the failure to provide for the necessary needs of the child" and the due process is handled through administrative law, whereby the recommendations to "convict" are generated by a child protection worker and presented for judicial determination which turns on the federal funding spigot of placing a child as a ward of the court or state.

I state that these are administrative proceedings as one is guilty until proven innocent, without notification of proceedings, denied the right to face one's accuser, with no redress to reinstate the termination of the grant of the gift of custodianship or guardianship.

This is better known as parental rights, but, sadly, is not.

Parental rights are bestowed upon the States Attorney General.

Secondly, what has never been considered is the legal concept of slavery or involuntary servitude with children.

The Thirteenth Amendment did take children into consideration as children were property, chattel of the original guardian, to end the break up of families in slave auctions and sales.

Unfortunately, children never had any recognized rights which is why child labor immediately replaced the institution of slavery after the Emancipation Proclamation.

Related image
Jackie Coogan & Charlie Chaplin
Enters Jackie Coogan.

The world has forgotten about Jackie Coogan, but that is about to change as I am putting him back into the annals of history.

Jackie Coogan was a child actor discovered by Charlie Chaplin who was probably, to this day, one of the most famous child actors known to film.

He went on to star in the Lil' Rascals and did many major films.

Coogan, as a young child star, went on to launch the million dollar Near East Relief campaign that collected food, clothes & money for the child survivors of WWI and the Armenian Genocide, the first international relief effort for children.

The campaign, I guess you can say, should be considered as the original model for what we know today as the political fundraising campaign.



Well, when Coogan became 18 years of age, he found out his parents had squandered his childhood acting earnings, well over a million.

This led to the 1939 California legislation, the first Child Protection Law providing legal protections for child actor's earnings called the "Coogan's Act' or the Child Actor's Bill, the original concept for Social Security Accounts, where parents had to put a percentage into Coogan Blocked Trust Accounts but it contained a few flaws.

Now, enters Shirley Temple, or rather the "Shirley Temple Amendment" which extended protections of a child actor's contracts.


Without going into her early career of Baby Burlesk, or the Meglin Kiddies, the core of this tale is children's trust funds.

As Coogan's career matured, he went on to become the beloved Uncle Fester of the Addam's Family while Shirley Temple became Shirley Temple Black, U.S. Delegate to the United Nations, and UNICEF.


The Thirteenth Amendment has a second section:
Section 2. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation
 Only one person has attempted to broach Section 2, but that was met with much reproach from the Meanies.

Besides, the approach is flawed as it omits the rights of children, but for the purposes of this tale, the economic rights of the child, the posterity of the nation which is our national treasure, as children grow up to be productive, tax paying citizens.

Well, it seems there are others who are quite aware of this fact and went on to optimistically address these "economic deficiencies" of the Thirteenth Amendment.



Essentially, the California Coogan Blocked Trust Accounts established what we know today as trust funds for minors, Uniform Gift To Minors Accounts (UGMA) and Uniform Transfers to Minors Accounts (UTMA), for the private sector, but there was no national law to this effect.

Neither was there international law in dealing with children's trust funds.
Image result for unicef
Now, enters UNICEF, the United Nations International Children's Emergency Fund.

UNICEF was created in 1946 as an extension of the successful international Near East Relief campaign to address the child refugees after WWII.

Sometime around early 1990s was the U.S. State Department through its international investment funding mechanism, USAID, partnered with UNICEF.

There are no records of what happened to all the money because UNICEF is a private organization, a trust fund for the children of the world.

It also seems that sometime during the transition of the Bush Administration into the Clinton Administration, there was a massive plundering of the Great Repository of the United States, the National Archives, with all records of the history of child welfare administration, programs, congressional hearings, and historic individuals work, such as Jackie Coogan and Shirley Temple Black, and anything else related to the history of UNICEF, have been destroyed.

The federal records were ordered to be transferred and disposed, not pursuant to any guidelines or rules of the National Archive Records Administration (see the checked box on the forms), but, instead the records were transferred to the William J. Clinton Presidential Library, where, upon executing a records search, one is sent.




As seen in the records, below, federal records were either ordered to be destroyed, or donated to the private sector, where, in this instance, is the William J. Clinton Library, where there is no such thing as FOIA in the private sector.

And that, boys and girls, is how the Clintons with the assistance of the Bush Administration, pillaged the National Archives of the United States of America and manipulated the historic record, and destroyed the integrity of the Congress to obviate in rulemaking. 

But now, the question is why?




So, why would the Clintons destroy federal records?

Children's trust funds!

Trust funds are dark money of the private sector because anything dealing with the welfare of a child is protected under the cloak of secrecy, and, immunity and can go into political campaigns.

Yes, the only laws on the books as to transfer and ownership of trust accounts are in the areas of banking and under child welfare, which has now been privatized.

If one must rely upon the state because they are too poor to "provide for the necessary needs of the child", that is abuse and neglect, grounds for termination of parental rights, or rather eminent domain of a Lis Pendens of Quiet Title on the chattel, which is nothing more than termination of parental rights.

The transfer of the chattel, the birth certificate, or, more intuitively, the deed to the child and the access to the equity, Social Security Trust Account of that child, transfers authority to the private sector over the trust account which can be leveraged into social impact bonds, or mortgaged.

And guess what you can do with a mortgage?

Bankruptcy or wipe it out, again with another Lis Pendens of Quiet Title on the chattel, which is nothing more than termination of parental rights.

And this ends another the tale of child welfare fraud.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Saturday, July 22, 2017

The rare moment when children are released by the Israeli revaha (cps/social services/welfare)

I have yet to make up my mind as to which country does a better job at legally kidnapping children, Israel or the U.S.

Israel Uses U.S. Immigrant Child Welfare Model



Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

CONYERS: After Trump Attacks DOJ, All 17 Judiciary Democrats Demand Immediate Hearings


Judiciary Dems: Failing to Act Now Will Allow Others to Inflict Lasting Damage to the Department of Justice

Washington, D.C. – Yesterday, in an interview with the New York Times, President Donald Trump indicated his contempt for the leadership of the Department of Justice.  The President directly attacked the credibility and fairness of Attorney General Jeff Sessions, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, acting FBI Director Andrew McCabe, and Special Counsel Robert Mueller.  President Trump also warned Special Counsel Mueller that there would be “a violation” if his investigators attempt to scrutinize his family’s finances.

Dean of the U.S. House
of Representatives
John Conyers, Jr.
Led by Ranking Member John Conyers, Jr., all seventeen Democrats on the House Committee on the Judiciary wrote to Chairman Bob Goodlatte to demand oversight hearings as soon as practicable, below. 

Although the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, and the Senate Committee on the Judiciary all continue to do work in this space, the House Committee on the Judiciary has not held a single oversight hearing related to the Russia investigation, allegations of obstruction of justice, or the President’s treatment of Department of Justice personnel.

The House Judiciary Committee has jurisdiction over the Department of Justice and the Federal Bureau of Investigation. It also has jurisdiction over the Foreign Agents Registration Act and the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Ricky Holland: Murdered By False Claims In Child Welfare

Ricky Holland,
Murdered by Michigan,
Billed to Medicaid
Sometimes, there is a need for reiteration.

You do not have the Right To Lie in a court of law.


You cannot submit false claims for federal cost reimbursement.

But you can submit false claims for federal cost reimbursement in Medicaid during a child welfare case, then funnel money into non-taxable trust funds, where that money is funneled into political campaigns and for other nefarious activities.


See, according to the False Claims Act:

Liability The statute begins, in § 3729(a), by explaining the conduct that creates FCA liability. In very general terms, §§ 3729(a)(1)(A) and (B) set forth FCA liability for any person who knowingly submits a false claim to the government or causes another to submit a false claim to the government or knowingly makes a false record or statement to get a false claim paid by the government. Section 3729(a)(1)(G) is known as the reverse false claims section; it provides liability where one acts improperly – not to get money from the government, but to avoid having to pay money to the government. Section 3729(a)(1)(C) creates liability for those who conspire to violate the FCA. Sections 3729(a)(1)(D), (E), and (F) are rarely invoked. 
But, herein lies the problem.

If, during another civil action, child welfare to be precise, judges find that a child placing agency, rather the State lied to legally kidnap a child and place as its ward, the Court is not mandated to refer any federal fraud to the States Attorney General nor the U.S. Attorney General.

One reason is because the States Attorney General are either prosecuting the child welfare case or defending its privatized contractual arm of the State.

There are so many child welfare cases, where it is documented in legal opinions, of false claims to federal programs.

There are so many Single Program Audits which are administratively adjudicated and monetarily settled, with no criminal penalties, no contractual disbarment, no listing on exclusionary databases of Medicaid, no sanctions, no removal of licensure.

Nada.

Then, there are so many secrecy laws, quite unique to privacy laws, where, these same child placing agencies have been found to, literally, get away with murder, which is exactly what happened in the Michigan case of Ricky Holland.


This is personal.

This is why Child Welfare is modern day human trafficking of "The Poors" (always said with clinched teeth), or as I have previously stated, those who are more comfortable utilizing the terms of the peculiar institution can are free to chime in.

Besides, how can the DOJ prosecute when the records are shredded?

So much for preserving the annals of history.

Always remember, it takes a judicial determination to turn on the federal funding spigot.

So, here you have it, federal policy on immunity from prosecution in child welfare and not one congressional hearing...yet.

Anyone want to help me re-write the False Claims Act?  You do know I already started on it, right.



Foster care and adoption is human trafficking and if you do not like what I have to say, then I strongly encourage you to submit a rebuttal, including your proofs.

In the academic and legislative world, these debates are skewed with dirty data, jack legged philosophies and ass backward theories.

In real life, the truth about human trafficking is not pretty, not pretty, at all.

I speak as an original source.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Selling Little Afghanistan Boys: UNICEF, Clinton Foundation, USAID

Guess who was behind this system being set up?

Come on, you can do it.

Fine, I shall tell you... The Clinton Foundation.

With more than $100 billion at stake in an international fraud scheme, certain people tend to look the other way while counting the money.

UNICEF was a key player in "looking the other way".

Selling chattel is the oldest form of survival.

This is just one end point in the child trafficking ratlines of war.

The same thing is going on in Haiti, but the girls are included.

Always remember, "It takes a village...then it pillages the resources."

Afghan soldiers are using boys as sex slaves, and the U.S. is looking the other way


KABUL – Last summer, an Afghan police commander invited me to his post for tea — and to view his “beautiful” boy sex slave.

I stumbled through a farm of chest-high opium poppy stocks to reach his mud-and-wattle outpost on the outskirts of Tarin Kot, the capital of southern Uruzgan province that is teetering in the face of a Taliban upsurge. On its open roof, a slight teenager sat next to his hulking captor, stealing sad glances at me as he quietly filled our tea glasses. A shock of auburn curls jutted out of his embroidered pillbox hat and his milky eyes were lined with kohl. The commander flaunted him the way a ringmaster exhibits an exotic animal. “See my beautiful bacha (boy slave),” he said, blithe and casual, a gun dangling at his side.

The commander, an ally of the United States in the war against the Taliban, is not an anomaly. Hundreds of such outposts of the Afghan Local Police (ALP), a front-line force armed and funded with U.S. taxpayer dollars, and other pro-government militias are believed to have enslaved young boys for dancing and sexual companionship, many of them kidnapped.

Freedom from the Taliban’s puritanical regime in 2001 also brought freedom to do “bacha bazi,” the cultural practice of sexual slavery and abuse of boys who are often dressed effeminately and whose possession is seen by Afghan strongmen as a marker of power and masculinity.

As the United States sinks deeper into the Afghan quagmire, preparing to send additional troops into a seemingly endless war, it is glossing over this hidden but pervasive abuse of children by its local allies. U.S. tolerance of this egregious inhumanity sends out the message that it is acceptable for U.S.-backed forces to keep child sex slaves.

It also has strong security implications. I reported last year how the Taliban are exploiting entrenched bacha bazi to infiltrate Afghan security ranks, effectively using child sex slaves — many of them brutally abused and hungry for revenge — as Trojan Horses to mount deadly insider attacks.
Institutionalized bacha bazi, described as culturally sanctioned male rape, is likely to continue unabated in the absence of any real deterrent. The United Nations has called on Afghanistan to urgently adopt legislation to criminalize bacha bazi and swiftly prosecute state officials guilty of the practice.

One senior official in Uruzgan described bacha bazi as an addiction worse than opium, saying commanders compete — and sometimes battle — one another to snatch pretty boys. Many prowl neighborhoods for boys “who have not seen the sun for years,” a cultural euphemism for unblemished beauty.

Last year when I unearthed a kidnapping epidemic of boys,  it was disturbing to see local authorities pussyfooting around the issue and using security to rationalize their inaction. On the surface, President Ashraf Ghani has vowed zero tolerance for bacha bazi in security forces. But multiple officials in southern Afghanistan told me that any action against guilty commanders  — a bulwark against insurgents — would anger them and cause them to abandon their posts with their loyalists, paving the way for the Taliban. There is therefore no desire to recover or rescue the innocent victims whose lives have been upended by this practice.
To completely understand this perverse logic, imagine an American sheriff with pedophilic proclivities openly snatching children — and instead of rescuing the victims and bringing the sheriff to justice, the administration pandered to his criminal behavior and justified letting him keep his job.
This heartless apathy explains why the commander I met was so shockingly blasé about keeping a sex slave. No senior official has ever been prosecuted for bacha bazi;  the commander probably knows that he, too, will escape punishment.

Afghanistan has also become a living tapestry of institutionalized abuse on Washington’s watch. As the conflict unspooled over 16 years, abusive strongmen were propped up to fight insurgents — from unruly militiamen sowing tyranny in their fiefdoms to torturers in military uniforms.
Buttressing abusive allies is a strategy best described as fighting fire with fire, which is pushing Afghanistan deeper into instability and chaos.

Security is a legitimate concern, but turning a blind eye to crimes such as bacha bazi amounts to a serious contravention of America’s Leahy amendment, which bans U.S. assistance or training to foreign military units that fail to honor basic human rights.

The United States needs to deploy the leverages at its disposal in a country heavily dependent on it for aid to end this overriding culture of impunity. Additional troops and financial assistance must be contingent upon urgent reform and prosecution of abusers.

To win in Afghanistan, America cannot afford to lose its humanity.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Member of International Child Exploitation Conspiracy Sentenced to 210 Months in Prison


Ok.  This is wonderful work, but, as a friend always says, "Firing the cashiers does not fix the franchise."

These are crumbs.

Where are the multi-million dollar NGO operations?

Waiting...

A Wichita, Kansas man was sentenced to 210 months in prison and 10 years of supervised release, for production of child pornography based on his participation in a website that was operated for the purpose of coercing and enticing minors as young as eight years old to engage in sexually explicit conduct on web camera.

Acting Assistant Attorney General Kenneth A. Blanco of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division; U.S. Attorney Dana J. Boente of the Eastern District of Virginia; and Section Chief John J. Brosnan of the FBI’s Violent Crimes Against Children Section (VCACS) made the announcement.

Allan Cortez, 34, was charged on April 4, 2016, and pleaded guilty before U.S. District Judge T.S. Ellis III of the Eastern District of Virginia on April 14.

According to admissions made in connection with the plea agreement, members of the conspiracy created false profiles on social networking sites popular with children, posing as young teenagers to lure children to two websites they controlled. Once on the conspirators’ websites, Cortez admitted that members of the conspiracy showed the children pre-recorded videos of prior minor victims, often engaging in sexually explicit conduct, to make the new victims think that they were chatting with another minor. Cortez further admitted that conspirators used these videos to coerce and entice children to engage in sexually explicit activity on their own web cameras, which could be viewed live by other members without the victim’s knowledge and which the website automatically recorded and made available for download later. Cortez admitted that he chatted with minors in furtherance of the conspiracy. The defendant also admitted that one of the websites ranked the efforts of the members to successfully coerce and entice children to engage in sexually explicit conduct on live web camera. Both websites have been disabled.

This case was investigated as part of Operation Subterfuge, a multinational investigation coordinated by members of the FBI’s Violent Crimes Against Children (VCAC) International Task Force. VCAC special agents led the investigation with the assistance of the FBI’s Operation Rescue Me and the FBI’s Digital Analysis and Research Center and the Office of Victim Assistance. The South Africa Police Service, Family Violence, Child Protection and Sexual Offenses, Gauteng; Royal Canadian Mounted Police, National Child Exploitation Coordination Centre; the Dutch Police Service Agency, KLPD; and the Australian Federal Police, Child Protection Operations, Sydney were active partners in Operation Subterfuge. To date, over 320 minor victims have been identified as part of this operation.

In addition to his prison sentence, the defendant was ordered to pay $15,215 of restitution.

Trial Attorney Lauren Britsch of the Criminal Division’s Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section (CEOS) and Assistant U.S. Attorney Whitney Russell of the Eastern District of Virginia prosecuted the case.

This case was brought as part of Project Safe Childhood, a nationwide initiative to combat the growing epidemic of child sexual exploitation and abuse launched in May 2006 by the Department of Justice. Led by U.S. Attorneys’ Offices and CEOS, Project Safe Childhood marshals federal, state and local resources to better locate, apprehend and prosecute individuals who exploit children via the Internet, as well as to identify and rescue victims. For more information about Project Safe Childhood, please visit www.justice.gov/psc.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©