Black fathers
must reclaim
their children...
By Ronald E. Smith

At the beginning of the 21st century the plague of
social problems associated with the demise of the
American family is all too evident. And nowhere
is the plight of the traditional family more evident
than in the African- American community.

America’s inner cities are in a shambles. Detroit has a 75
percent out-of-wedlock birth rate, an 85 percent rate of
fatherlessness and a pathetic high school graduation
rate of 29 percent. Moreover, six out of every 10
families living in the state of Michigan have had
intervention by child protective services.

In 1960, somewhere between 66 percent and 80
percent of black children living in the inner cities lived
in intact families. Today the number is less than 33
percent. That is a calamity. In 1960 about 22 percent
of black children were born out of wedlock; today, the
number is somewhere between 70 and 85 percent, and
it’s getting worse.

The presumed good intentions of the 1960s “Great
Society” and the “War on Poverty” had just the
opposite effect on Black America. Social programs
produced public policies that have further divided the
black family. Victimization and entitlement have
become the accepted norm.

I certainly agree with those eminent members of my
community who believe that black men, in fact all men,
must stand tall and be “ responsible,” but I wholly
disagree with Mr. Roland Martin, and other prominent
individuals, like Dr. William (Bill) Cosby and Dr.
Allan Pouissant, who want to ‘blame’ black fathers for
the familial disconnect. With due respect to these intelligent
individuals, their conclusion is superficial. It is based
upon the thinking of someone who has not tasted first hand
what goes on in the trenches where familial demise begins [and
ends for many]: the family courts and state agencies
that constitute the ‘system’.

Once one takes the time to understand and
witness how the system works, (or doesn’t) one
quickly sees a glaring disconnect. The system is
driving fathers from their families with total disregard
for the social and economic consequences. The
system is destroying black families at light speed.

I am an African-American father. I love my children
dearly. I take my fatherhood responsibilities seriously.
But the mother of my children, who believed in
‘matriarchal superiority,’ was able to use a system
designed to exacerbate problems rather than alleviate
or reconcile them. She used the system to ensure that
I became irrelevant, and that drove me from my
children’s lives. I lived it. I watched it happen. I spent
the better part of my children’s lives working two full-
time jobs, making sure that excessive child support
was paid. I also spent time calling the Chicago Police
asking for assistance because my children’s mother
made it a game to hide the kids when Dad was coming.
Yet the system didn’t care. The system allowed my
children’s mother to teach our children to disrespect
me. This parental alienation followed my oldest son to
his grave, as he died at age 21, of liver cancer earlier
this year. In fact, the funeral arrangements made by
his mother had absolutely no mention of my family or
me in the obituary.

My surviving son is 20 years old and I was reminded
of the parental alienation of my sons recently when
my 50th birthday passed with no card or call from him.

It’s time for African-American leaders to become
objective about the dismal plight of the black family,
and proactive towards finding solutions. Blaming
black men is not the answer. The current ‘system’ and
the paradigm it has created and perpetuates, must be
restructured. Federal funding incentives that invite
the states to participate in the business of familial
destruction must be recognized, scrutinized and
changed.
Ronald E. Smith, president and CEO of Children Need Both
Parents, Inc. is a minister and family activist in Michigan.

Family Preservation and Reconciliation Act of 2008
110th CONGRESS
2nd Session
To protect the fundamental right of a parent to the care and custody of a child and to direct the
upbringing of a child, and for other purposes.
2007
A BILL
To protect the fundamental right of a parent to the care and custody of a child and to direct the
upbringing of a child, and for other purposes.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in
Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the `Family Preservation and Reconciliation Act of 2007'.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS AND PURPOSES.
(a) FINDINGS- Congress finds that--
(1) the Supreme Court has regarded the right of parents to direct the upbringing of
their children as a fundamental right implicit in the concept of ordered liberty within
the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution, as specified in Meyer v. Nebraska,
262 U.S. 390 (1923) and Pierce v. Society of Sisters, 268 U.S. 510 (1925); the right
of parents to the care and custody of their children has been recognized as “a
fundamental right protected by the First, Fifth, Ninth and Fourteenth Amendments” in
Doe v. Irwin, 441 F. Supp. 1247 1251 (D. Mich. 1977), as “far more precious than
property rights” and by the Supreme Court as an “essential” right that protects a
substantial interest that “undeniably warrants deference, and, absent a powerful
countervailing interest, protection," in May v. Anderson, 345 U.S. 528, 533 (1953),
Meyer v. Nebraska, 262 U.S. 390, 399 (1923), and Stanley v. Illinois, 405 U.S. 645
(1971); and the Supreme Court has held in Troxel v. Granville, 530 US 2000 (99-
138), that “the liberty interest at issue . . . the interest of parents in the care, custody,
and control of their children – is perhaps the oldest of the fundamental liberty
interests recognized by this Court. . . . [I]t cannot now be doubted that the Due
Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment protects the fundamental right of
parents to make decisions concerning the care, custody, and control of their children.”
(2) this right has been acknowledged for centuries by the common law, and by the
tradition of western civilization, which recognizes that parents have the responsibility
to love, nurture, train, and protect their children;
(3) the role of parents in the raising and rearing of their children is of inestimable
value and deserving of both praise and protection by all levels of government;
(4) some decisions of Federal and State courts have treated the right of parents not as
a fundamental right but as a non-fundamental right, resulting in an improper standard
of judicial review being applied to government conduct that adversely affects parental
rights and prerogatives;
(5) parents face increasing intrusions into their legitimate decisions and prerogatives
by government agencies in situations that do not involve traditional understandings of
abuse or neglect but simply are a conflict of parenting philosophies;
(6) governments should not interfere in the decisions and actions of parents without
compelling justification; and
(7) the traditional 4-step process used by courts to evaluate cases concerning the right
of parents described in paragraph (1) appropriately balances the interests of parents,
children, and government; and
(8) the in-tact family is a cornerstone for our society and children are best raised in
an in-tact family; and
(9) Congress recognizes the benefits of marriage for men, women, children and
society as a whole and has expressed its intent for marriage through legislative
incentives and programs involving the use of federal funds promoting marriage and
the family; and
(10 ) state government intrusion into the family, absent compelling justification thus
establishing an empowered custodial parent and disenfranchised non-custodial parent
is an incentive for divorce and inconsistent with Congress’ intent.
(b) PURPOSES- The purposes of this Act are--
(1) to protect the right of parents to the care and custody of their children and to direct
the upbringing of their children as a fundamental right;
(2) to protect children from abuse and neglect as the terms have been traditionally
defined and applied in State law, such protection being a compelling government
interest;
(3) while protecting the rights of parents, to acknowledge that the rights involve
responsibilities and specifically that parents have the responsibility to see that their
children are educated, for the purposes of literacy and self-sufficiency, as specified by
the Supreme Court in Wisconsin v. Yoder, 406 U.S. 205 (1972);
(4) to preserve the common law tradition that allows parental choices to prevail in a
health care decision for a child unless, by neglect or refusal, the parental decision will
result in danger to the life of the child or result in serious physical injury to the child;
(5) to fix a standard of judicial review for parental rights, leaving to the courts the
application of the rights in particular cases based on the facts of the cases and law as
applied to the facts; and
(6) to reestablish a 4-step process to evaluate cases concerning the right of parents
described in paragraph (1) that--
(A) requires a parent to initially demonstrate that--
(i) the action in question arises from the right of the parent to direct the
upbringing of a child; and
(ii) a government has interfered with or usurped the right; and
(B) shifts the burdens of production and persuasion to the government to
demonstrate that--
(i) the interference or usurpation is essential to accomplish a
compelling governmental interest; and
(ii) the method of intervention or usurpation used by the government is
the least restrictive means of accomplishing the compelling interest.
(7) To preserve the institution of marriage and maintain familial ties.
SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.
As used in this Act:
(1) APPROPRIATE EVIDENCE- The term `appropriate evidence' means--
(A) for a case in which a government seeks a temporary or preliminary action
or order, except a case in which the government seeks to terminate parental
custody or visitation, evidence that demonstrates probable cause; and
(B) for a case in which a government seeks a final action or order, or in which
the government seeks to terminate or restrict parental custody or visitation,
clear and convincing evidence.
(2) CHILD- The term `child' has the meaning provided by State law.
(3) PARENT- The term `parent' has the meaning provided by State law.
(4) RIGHT OF A PARENT TO DIRECT THE UPBRINGING OF A CHILD-
(A) IN GENERAL- The term `right of a parent to direct the upbringing of a
child' includes, but is not limited to a right of a parent regarding--
(i) directing or providing for the education of the child;
(ii) making a health care decision for the child, except as provided in
subparagraph (B);
(iii) disciplining the child, including reasonable corporal discipline,
except as provided in subparagraph (C);
(iv) directing or providing for the religious teaching of the child; and
(v) inculcating moral and ethical principles.
(B) NO APPLICATION TO PARENTAL DECISIONS ON HEALTH
CARE- The term `right of a parent to direct the upbringing of a child' shall not
include a right of a parent to make a decision on health care for the child that,
by neglect or refusal, will result in danger to the life of the child or in serious
physical injury to the child.
(C) NO APPLICATION TO ABUSE AND NEGLECT- The term `right of a
parent to direct the upbringing of a child' shall not include a right of a parent
to act or refrain from acting in a manner that constitutes abuse or neglect of a
child, as the terms have traditionally been defined and applied in State
criminal law.
SEC. 4. PROHIBITION ON INTERFERING WITH OR USURPING RIGHTS
OF PARENTS.
(1) No Federal, State, or local government, or any official of such a government acting under
color of law, or any other party, shall interfere with or usurp the right of a parent to the care
and custody of the child of the parent or to direct the upbringing of the child of the parent,
and that in accordance with long established legal doctrines presuming (a) that each parent is
fit and (b) that fit parents are presumed to act in their child[ren]’s best interest; no removal of
a child from the care of any fit parent absent a finding of parental unfitness by clear and
convincing evidence may be effected; unless
(2) that parent has been criminally charged and convicted for the abuse or neglect of that child
as defined and applied in State criminal law; or
(3) removal of the child is necessary due to danger of imminent or substantial harm to the child.
(4) It is the specific finding and intent of this bill that public policy is furthered, and a that
child[ren]’s best interest is served, by maximizing the amount of time a child[ren] spend with
each parent in the event the parents divorce, separate or are never married.
SEC. 5. STRICT SCRUTINY.
No exception to section 4 shall be permitted, unless the government or official is able to
demonstrate, by clear and convincing evidence, that the interference or usurpation is essential
to accomplish a compelling governmental interest and is narrowly drawn or applied in a
manner that is the least restrictive means of accomplishing the compelling interest.
SEC. 6. CLAIM OR DEFENSE.
Any parent may raise a violation of this Act in an action in a Federal or State court, or before
an administrative tribunal, of appropriate jurisdiction as a claim or a defense.
SEC. 7. ATTORNEY'S FEES.
Subsections (b) and (c) of section 722 of the Revised Statutes (42 U.S.C. 1988 (b) and (c))
(concerning the award of attorney's and expert fees) shall apply to cases brought or defended
under this Act. A person who uses this Act to defend against a suit by a government
described in section 4 shall be construed to be the plaintiff for the purposes of the application
of such subsections.
SEC. 8. SEVERABILITY
If any provision of this Act or of an amendment made by this Act, or any application of such
provision to any person or circumstance, is held to be unconstitutional, the remainder of this
Act, the amendments made by this Act, and the application of the provision to any other
person or circumstance shall not be affected.

Of course we expect Marianne Udow to paint a picture of efficiency within the Department of Human Services, that is her job when in actuality, the State department that we have relied upon to look out for the children of the State of Michigan has transformed itself under the guise of "in the best interest of the child" into a notorious child trafficking business for profit.

This is an industry funded through Title IV which pays incentives to the state to remove children which has also prompted a rash of falsification of documentation, the destruction of loving homes and in the event that the allegations are incorrect, they make no effort to help to restore the lives of the families that they have walked on and destroyed.

What she means when she says better foster care is coming is that they have devised a method of funneling more Title IV funding to their cronies who have climbed into bed with them. Let us check the board of directors of the agencies who will be responsible for handling the foster care and see exactly who is involved with these agencies from the courts and hospitals and elected officials and then we see the real picture.

I suggest that Ms Udow stop blowing smoke and realize that the trafficking of children scheme has been recognized nationwide and we will be in Washington DC on August 18, 2007 to let everyone know that GOVERNMENT HAS COME INTO OUR HOUSEHOLDS AND WE WANT THEM OUT!!!

Minister Ronald Smith, CEO

While many in the feminist movement make claim that Parental Alienation is junk science and it simply is a defense for men who batter women, I believe this thought pattern to be based simply on the personal experience of those who initiate this view and narrow minded of those who have neither first hand experience or simply go along for the ride.

The fact of the matter is, Parental Alienation takes place every minute of every day in every city in this country. It is the result of the violation of the parental rights of one parent through the awarding of custody which takes away the Constitutional right of a person to parent his or her children. This is a right guaranteed under the XIV Amendment but violated on a daily basis by judges who either believe themselves to be above the Constitution or have forgotten what they learned in law school.

While these violations take place, the overall attitude of parents who have made children together, turn to dislike and or hatred of the other parent. This breeds concious acts by the parent awarded custody to hurt the other parent by turning children against the other parent for whatever reason.

There is generally no basis for the aforementioned activity other than the perpetuation of an advesarial relationship between what once were two individuals in love, by attorneys, court mediators, child support collection mechanisms and oh yes let us not forget the judges.

The relationship between parent and child is a sacred relationship and should be fostered at all cost by our family court system however, there is no profit when people are working together. Consequently, alienating a child from a parent by those who have been awarded custody and have more time and influence over the children, will destroy not only the parent child relationship during the formative years of children but it will inevitably surface within the children as maladjustments and poor peer choices.

Minister Ronald Smith

Ode To Richmond
By Ronald Smith

Bluish green in color he entered this world
Just before I cut his umbilical cord.
Happy with spirit and energy was he,
The school says, “there’s a problem"
Must be ADHD.
Ritalin is the answer...IT SURELY MUST BE.
It took away his spirit, his energy, his glee
Made him very stoic, much like an elm tree.
The one thing that we did not expect,
The drug had a very ugly major negative side effect.
Twenty years old, Richmond is fighting for his life
With tumors in his liver he is fighting with all his might.
My child's condition, I can't bear the thought,
When the doctor prescribed it
This effect was not taught. If your child
Has spirit, don't kill them with drugs,
Instead of Ritalin give praises and hugs.

The recent horror story of a fifteen-month delay in Florida officials discovering that foster child Rilya Wilson had apparently been kidnapped by persons knowledgeable of the inner workings of the child protection system was due to the systematic falsification of child protection system records. This falsification of child protection system records is part of a national pattern of organized crime. It is not an isolated incident.



The Rilya Wilson case is the tip of a criminal iceberg. Beginning about 1973, criminal elements in the mental health and social work professions began cooperating to construct an organized criminal enterprise that exploits children behind the legislated secrecy of the child protection, juvenile justice, and mental health systems. The contemporary end result is a nationwide organized criminal operation that uses everything from sophisticated science-fraud-based "evaluation" instruments structured to produce false positives to third party state service contracts written to sustain a system of structural corruption in which state employees and contract service providers must falsify records and testimony or they will not continue to be employed or paid.



To maintain their existence, organized criminal operations must construct management bureaucracies with policies and procedures necessary to sustain daily operations, just like any other bureaucracy. The only adaptation required to run criminal operations in the government and quasi-government agencies which constitute the child protection system is that they must be integrated into the policies and procedures of the umbrella agency and not be detected as components of a criminal bureaucracy.



The existence of organized crime in the child protection system of any given state is not that difficult to detect. Prominent among the indicators are:

(1) the annual number of founded child abuse allegations can be predicted from the number of conditional federal grant and reimbursement salary fund dollars needed to balance the state child protection agency payroll (the number of children taken into state custody each year will be the number sufficient to generate the federal fund claims necessary to balance the agency payroll); and

(2) third party contracts to file state child protection agency federal fund claims will contain provisions that only compensate the contractor for increases in federal funds paid to the state over and above the amount paid in the previous contract for such claim filing services. The latter creates a system that will only result in compensation to the contractor if the number of children taken into state custody constantly increases and/or the total claims generated from each child in state custody increases each contract cycle. The net result is a system in which everyone stays employed only if the number of founded child abuse cases and children taken into state custody always increases and never decreases. An important byproduct of this criminal process of exploiting children independent of the true child abuse rate is the blind political support for the criminal operations generated by the constant flow of conditional federal funds into the respective State's economy. In the Rilya Wilson case, even the Foster Mother continued to receive and accept payments for the care of Rilya over a year after the child disappeared. Caseworkers reportedly told her to take the money.



There are similar lessons to be drawn from the embarrassment of the Bush Administration over numerous ignored warnings that Osama bin Laden planned to hijack planes and fly them into buildings and the embarrassment of Florida Officials having to explain fifteen months of falsified child protection records, sworn court testimony that Rilya Wilson was in Florida State custody and doing fine, and falsified federal fund claims for services delivered to a child that may have been dead the entire time. After the collapse of the World Trade Center , both the American Public and terrorists worldwide now know the United States is vulnerable to attack, due in large part to corruption, incompetence and mismanagement in intelligence and law enforcement agencies. After the Rilya Wilson case in Florida , the Public and every child molester, pornographer and other criminal who need children for their misdeeds know that the corruption, incompetence and mismanagement in the child protection system can be exploited as cover to acquire children for their own illicit purposes. What happened to Rilya Wilson in Florida can happen in any state where the current organized criminal exploitation of children is allowed to continue. Sooner or later other criminals, including child molesters and child pornographers, are going to become sufficiently aware of the mechanisms the current organized criminals are using to manage their criminal bureaucracy that they will also be able to exploit the system, as were the people who reportedly kidnapped Rilya Wilson and returned a week later to collect her clothes. Among the obvious possibilities is obtaining information about the criminal activity (falsifying federal claims, official reports, insurance claims, etc.) of individual state employees or licensed professionals, like psychiatrists and psychologist, and blackmailing them to allow access to children for criminal exploitation or perversion.



Of major importance to prosecutors is that the systematic falsification of records by child protection system crime participants in psychiatry, psychology, social work and child abuse investigation units, results in the systematic falsification of evidence used in child related criminal and civil judicial proceedings. While it may be tempting not to look to closely at experts and evidence which make convictions easier, relying on criminals who help conceal their nefarious enterprises by providing convenient services to the people who should be prosecuting them is a house of cards that will collapse locally or nationally at some point. We have the contemporary examples of the falsification of evidence in the Los Angeles Police Department and the newly documented error rate in death row convictions.



Unless something is done to shut down the organized criminal activity in every state in which it exists, Rilya Wilson is not going to be the last horror story to capture national attention. Careers will be ruined, as they have been in Florida , and people will end up going to prison for crimes far beyond what they thought they were getting themselves into by falsifying a few reports to get federal funds into the state or for insurance claims. Prosecutors, Legislators, and other state officials who thought they were benefiting their state by looking the other way because federal funds were coming into the state's economy, may end up having to face situations far uglier than they ever thought. Former Arkansas State Senator Nick Wilson is now in federal prison for his sponsorship and participation in one such legislated criminal enterprise to exploit children. Other Arkansas attorneys involved lost their licenses to practice law. An Austin , Texas DHS Supervisor committed suicide after allegedly being caught running a foster child prostitution ring from his office computer. In a recent Arkansas Legislative Session, a bill drafted by Arkansas Department of Human Services employees was discovered to contain provisions that would have required employees to lie about records and facts, even if subpoenaed. The bill was withdrawn once the Legislator duped into being the primary sponsor was made aware of its contents. In a June 6, 2002, opinion, the Arkansas Supreme Court ruled that an infant Arkansas citizen had been illegally transferred to Florida State custody in what was essentially an interstate criminal conspiracy to seize and transport children in complete disregard of State and Federal law. (See Arkansas Department of Human Services v Cox, Supreme Court of Arkansas No. 01-1021, 349ark, issue 3, sc 9, 6 June 2002 http://courts.state.ar.us/opinions/2002a/20020606/01-1021.wpd)



The important point being that these child protection system criminals will be pushing the envelop on what they can get away with, as in these examples, and sometimes that envelop will rupture, as in the Rilya Wilson case, exposing not only the criminals but government officials and private citizens who were indirectly benefiting from the criminal activity. The important question being how sophisticated, brutal and embarrassing will organized crime in the child protection system be allowed to become before it is addressed.



In the hope that my documentation of how the organized crime bureaucracy functions in the child protection system will help prevent any repeats of the Rilya Wilson horror story, I draw the material to your attention. Below is the master link page address for six articles I have written on how crime in the child protection is created, organized and managed. The six articles will provide an overview of the context in which a child's kidnapping can be concealed for over a year. Although written for the popular media, each article contains detailed instructions on how to detect various mechanisms used by organized criminals operating in the child protection system to sustain their operations. Part II contains a formula for determining if the annual number of founded child abuse allegations can accurately be predicted from the number of conditional federal salary fund dollars needed to balance the child protection agency payroll.



See links to Parts I-VI of "Crime Management in Government" at:



http://www.eighthcity.com/Articles/Rogerbrown/rogerbrown.htm



I sincerely hope you will use this information to determine if the child protection system in your state has an organized crime problem. I do not want to see any more stories like that of Rilya Wilson, when I know they can be prevented by ending the influence of organized crime in the child protection system.



If I may be of further assistance, please contact me at:



James Roger Brown

Director

THE SOCIOLOGY CENTER

P.O. Box 2075

Little Rock, AR 72115

(501) 374-1788

thesociologist@aol.com





The Rilya Wilson Case



Back to Articles



Back to Main










--------------------------------------------------------------------------------




NATIONAL ADVISORY ON ORGANIZED CRIME OPERATING IN THE CHILD PROTECTION SYSTEM

By James Roger Brown, Director, THE SOCIOLOGY CENTER





James Roger Brown is the director of THE SOCIOLOGY CENTER.

The Advisory was sent by e-mail to every Prosecutor and State Attorney General in the United States. It has also been posted on several websites.

It is published here with the kind consent of the author.






The recent horror story of a fifteen-month delay in Florida officials discovering that foster child Rilya Wilson had apparently been kidnapped by persons knowledgeable of the inner workings of the child protection system was due to the systematic falsification of child protection system records. This falsification of child protection system records is part of a national pattern of organized crime. It is not an isolated incident.



The Rilya Wilson case is the tip of a criminal iceberg. Beginning about 1973, criminal elements in the mental health and social work professions began cooperating to construct an organized criminal enterprise that exploits children behind the legislated secrecy of the child protection, juvenile justice, and mental health systems. The contemporary end result is a nationwide organized criminal operation that uses everything from sophisticated science-fraud-based "evaluation" instruments structured to produce false positives to third party state service contracts written to sustain a system of structural corruption in which state employees and contract service providers must falsify records and testimony or they will not continue to be employed or paid.



To maintain their existence, organized criminal operations must construct management bureaucracies with policies and procedures necessary to sustain daily operations, just like any other bureaucracy. The only adaptation required to run criminal operations in the government and quasi-government agencies which constitute the child protection system is that they must be integrated into the policies and procedures of the umbrella agency and not be detected as components of a criminal bureaucracy.



The existence of organized crime in the child protection system of any given state is not that difficult to detect. Prominent among the indicators are:

(1) the annual number of founded child abuse allegations can be predicted from the number of conditional federal grant and reimbursement salary fund dollars needed to balance the state child protection agency payroll (the number of children taken into state custody each year will be the number sufficient to generate the federal fund claims necessary to balance the agency payroll); and

(2) third party contracts to file state child protection agency federal fund claims will contain provisions that only compensate the contractor for increases in federal funds paid to the state over and above the amount paid in the previous contract for such claim filing services. The latter creates a system that will only result in compensation to the contractor if the number of children taken into state custody constantly increases and/or the total claims generated from each child in state custody increases each contract cycle. The net result is a system in which everyone stays employed only if the number of founded child abuse cases and children taken into state custody always increases and never decreases. An important byproduct of this criminal process of exploiting children independent of the true child abuse rate is the blind political support for the criminal operations generated by the constant flow of conditional federal funds into the respective State's economy. In the Rilya Wilson case, even the Foster Mother continued to receive and accept payments for the care of Rilya over a year after the child disappeared. Caseworkers reportedly told her to take the money.



There are similar lessons to be drawn from the embarrassment of the Bush Administration over numerous ignored warnings that Osama bin Laden planned to hijack planes and fly them into buildings and the embarrassment of Florida Officials having to explain fifteen months of falsified child protection records, sworn court testimony that Rilya Wilson was in Florida State custody and doing fine, and falsified federal fund claims for services delivered to a child that may have been dead the entire time. After the collapse of the World Trade Center, both the American Public and terrorists worldwide now know the United States is vulnerable to attack, due in large part to corruption, incompetence and mismanagement in intelligence and law enforcement agencies. After the Rilya Wilson case in Florida, the Public and every child molester, pornographer and other criminal who need children for their misdeeds know that the corruption, incompetence and mismanagement in the child protection system can be exploited as cover to acquire children for their own illicit purposes. What happened to Rilya Wilson in Florida can happen in any state where the current organized criminal exploitation of children is allowed to continue. Sooner or later other criminals, including child molesters and child pornographers, are going to become sufficiently aware of the mechanisms the current organized criminals are using to manage their criminal bureaucracy that they will also be able to exploit the system, as were the people who reportedly kidnapped Rilya Wilson and returned a week later to collect her clothes. Among the obvious possibilities is obtaining information about the criminal activity (falsifying federal claims, official reports, insurance claims, etc.) of individual state employees or licensed professionals, like psychiatrists and psychologist, and blackmailing them to allow access to children for criminal exploitation or perversion.



Of major importance to prosecutors is that the systematic falsification of records by child protection system crime participants in psychiatry, psychology, social work and child abuse investigation units, results in the systematic falsification of evidence used in child related criminal and civil judicial proceedings. While it may be tempting not to look to closely at experts and evidence which make convictions easier, relying on criminals who help conceal their nefarious enterprises by providing convenient services to the people who should be prosecuting them is a house of cards that will collapse locally or nationally at some point. We have the contemporary examples of the falsification of evidence in the Los Angeles Police Department and the newly documented error rate in death row convictions.



Unless something is done to shut down the organized criminal activity in every state in which it exists, Rilya Wilson is not going to be the last horror story to capture national attention. Careers will be ruined, as they have been in Florida, and people will end up going to prison for crimes far beyond what they thought they were getting themselves into by falsifying a few reports to get federal funds into the state or for insurance claims. Prosecutors, Legislators, and other state officials who thought they were benefiting their state by looking the other way because federal funds were coming into the state's economy, may end up having to face situations far uglier than they ever thought. Former Arkansas State Senator Nick Wilson is now in federal prison for his sponsorship and participation in one such legislated criminal enterprise to exploit children. Other Arkansas attorneys involved lost their licenses to practice law. An Austin, Texas DHS Supervisor committed suicide after allegedly being caught running a foster child prostitution ring from his office computer. In a recent Arkansas Legislative Session, a bill drafted by Arkansas Department of Human Services employees was discovered to contain provisions that would have required employees to lie about records and facts, even if subpoenaed. The bill was withdrawn once the Legislator duped into being the primary sponsor was made aware of its contents. In a June 6, 2002, opinion, the Arkansas Supreme Court ruled that an infant Arkansas citizen had been illegally transferred to Florida State custody in what was essentially an interstate criminal conspiracy to seize and transport children in complete disregard of State and Federal law. (See Arkansas Department of Human Services v Cox, Supreme Court of Arkansas No. 01-1021, 349ark, issue 3, sc 9, 6 June 2002 http://courts.state.ar.us/opinions/2002a/20020606/01-1021.wpd)



The important point being that these child protection system criminals will be pushing the envelop on what they can get away with, as in these examples, and sometimes that envelop will rupture, as in the Rilya Wilson case, exposing not only the criminals but government officials and private citizens who were indirectly benefiting from the criminal activity. The important question being how sophisticated, brutal and embarrassing will organized crime in the child protection system be allowed to become before it is addressed.



In the hope that my documentation of how the organized crime bureaucracy functions in the child protection system will help prevent any repeats of the Rilya Wilson horror story, I draw the material to your attention. Below is the master link page address for six articles I have written on how crime in the child protection is created, organized and managed. The six articles will provide an overview of the context in which a child's kidnapping can be concealed for over a year. Although written for the popular media, each article contains detailed instructions on how to detect various mechanisms used by organized criminals operating in the child protection system to sustain their operations. Part II contains a formula for determining if the annual number of founded child abuse allegations can accurately be predicted from the number of conditional federal salary fund dollars needed to balance the child protection agency payroll.



See links to Parts I-VI of "Crime Management in Government" at:



http://www.eighthcity.com/Articles/Rogerbrown/rogerbrown.htm



I sincerely hope you will use this information to determine if the child protection system in your state has an organized crime problem. I do not want to see any more stories like that of Rilya Wilson, when I know they can be prevented by ending the influence of organized crime in the child protection system.



If I may be of further assistance, please contact me at:



James Roger Brown

Director

THE SOCIOLOGY CENTER

P.O. Box 2075

Little Rock, AR 72115

(501) 374-1788

thesociologist@aol.com

When the Child Protective Service comes to your door, take it seriously. Never think that it can't happen to you because you're a good parent. It can, and has happened to millions of good parents. Being a good parent is an aberration to a DHS/CPS/DCFS agent. They're taught that all parents are "potential" child abusers and that if any of the symptoms are present, it's better to "err on the side of caution" and take the children. They're also taught to do anything, say anything, lie, con, and swindle to get into the house to question the children and the parents.
1. Be polite, even if you're incensed: Their insufferable, insidious, condescending attitude will make you angry. It is designed to do so to allow them to write in their report: "Subject exhibits latent violence and is uncooperative." Strike one. That's part of the scam.

2. Don't allow them into your home without a proper warrant: They will lie, intimidate, and attempt to con their way into your home, but don't allow it. Unless they have a properly issued warrant, signed by a judge, based on sworn testimony by a named person, they have no right to enter your home -- unless they can pony up a possible danger to the child. Be polite while refusing entry. There's nothing a DHS/CPS/DCFS worker likes more than for you to show anger and, especially, curse them. They are usually accompanied by policemen, some of whom will push their way in. If this happens, you may sue each person involved personally (police officers and all authority figures are personally liable for damages when they exceed their lawful authority and exceeding their authority is not protected by the Good Samaritan laws) not for charging you, but for forcing his or her way in. Don't get beat up trying top stop them in this case. Sue them later. You will probably need the money later.
Remember, case law has held that if you invite them into your home, you give up your right to be safe from search and seizure. Don't let them in! Make them force it.
3. Don't sign anything: They will try to get you to sign papers, "just to get this sorted out, don'tcha know," but don't fall into their trap. The only reason for you to have to sign anything is for you to sign away your rights. Politely refuse to sign anything until your attorney has seen it and advises you to do so. And suspect your attorney's advice if DHS/CPS/DCFS recommended him.

4. Don't answer any questions without (your) lawyer being present: DHS/CPS/DCFS workers will take this as an indication of guilt, but that's OK. They twist everything you do or say into an indication of guilt in their minds. But if you allow them to ask you questions without a lawyer present, you've given up your right to remain silent.

5. Do allow them to see the children through the window to assure them they're OK: To reduce the possibility that they'll testify that you kept them from seeing the children because they were abused, bring the children to a front window and let them see them.

6. Do take the children to your own doctor as soon as possible: The next thing to do is take the children to your own doctor and have them examined to show that no abuse, sexual or otherwise, has occurred. Then have the doctor write a report on his findings and give a copy of it to DHS/CPS/DCFS. If they have decided to charge you anyway, they will reject it and insist on their own examination, which, once they have taken the children they may do, and you can't stop it. But your original doctor's examination can be an effective counterpoint if their doctor says abuse has occurred, which they often do. They know who pays them for the right finding.

7. Don't believe anything they tell you: DHS/CPS/DCFS workers are trained in all the best ways to con and scam you into doing what they want you to do. They're experts at it. Their training spends a lot more time on this than it does on what actually constitutes child abuse. They're subjected to months, even years of conditioning and brainwashing themselves, disguised as training. Many are not even aware they're running a con on you. They think what they do is necessary to get child abusers off the street. Many are good people who really do care about the welfare of the children. It is the people in charge who have the ulterior motive to take complete control over your children for their nefarious purposes. But the result is the same. They lie.

8. Don't allow unsupervised interviews with the children: Unsupervised interviews with your children are little more than conditioning sessions where DHS/CPS/DCFS workers and their captive counselors use questioning methods that would not be allowed to be used against a murderer, much less against a frightened and impressionable child. Your children just aren't prepared to withstand such leading questioning, which is designed to get something on you. They con them into believing that you're already in big trouble, and you can be saved if the children will just say you did something so they can go home. After children have been taken, there's nothing you can do to stop these unsupervised interviews that will take place over a period of months, even years, until your children may finally break down and tell them what they want to hear, just to make it stop. But if you stop them from doing it in the beginning, there is a chance that charges will never be filed and they will not be taken from you.

9. Don't allow them to physically examine the child without your presence, or your lawyer's presence: Never allow them uncontrolled access to your children as long as they are in your custody. If a court orders a physical examination (while you still have custody), insist on either being present yourself, or have your attorney present to protect your, and your children's interests In addition, you should try to videotape all sessions or get a court order forcing them to do so, with copies to be available to you.

10. Don't allow them to come to your home later for an interview: Allowing them to enter later also forfeits your right to be safe from search and seizure. And you can be sure that a sharp-eyed DHS/CPS/DCFS worker will be able to find something they can twist to incriminate you. If interviews are required, insist that they be at the DHS/CPS/DCFS office, or better still, at your attorney's office (that way they can't just take them while you're there).

11. Tape record all conversations with DHS/CPS/DCFS workers and others involved: To keep an accurate record of events, plus to have proof of any threats made by DHS/CPS/DCFS workers or counselors, always tape record all conversations with them, either in person or by phone (there's an inexpensive attachment for your phone available at any electronics store, or Radio Shack). Some states restrict your right to tape conversations, so check your state laws. In states that allow secret taping if one of the parties to the tape knows, you can either let them know they're being taped, or not, at your wish. But in states where notification is required, you should place the tape recorder in full view in personal interviews, and make it a point to advise them they're being taped at the beginning of every phone call. In this day and age, where there's almost a videotape camera in every home, videotapes of proceedings can also help. Make a record. Then they can't deny their violation of your rights (Personally, I would make sure they knew they were being taped, even if the law doesn't require it).

12. Keep a journal: The same applies to keeping a journal. If you keep a detailed chronological (day-to-day) journal of events, showing dates, times, quotes, reference to audiotapes and videotapes, etc., they won't be able to get away with lying when they say they notified you of a hearing when they didn't. The very existence of such a journal (and you should definitely let them know you're keeping it) will tend to keep them somewhat more honest, or at least make it more difficult for them to scam you.

13. Never accept a plea bargain if you're innocent: One of their basic patterns is to pile charge upon charge, knowing they can't make most of them stick, including the ones they hope will stick, so they can tell you all about all the long years your children will spend in foster care if you don't accept the plea bargain they're offering you. One of their best-used lines is that “if you just confess you will get your children back sooner”. It's a tired old con, people. If they had any kind of a strong case, you'd never see them until it was court time. I don't care how good their plea bargain sounds, if you're innocent, don't fall for it. That's how they get most of the convictions they do get of innocent people. They make it look as bad as possible, and then get you to plead guilty, which involve an admission of guilt. Or plead no contest, which allows them to still treat you as guilty.

14. Hire a private investigator if you can afford it: I know that most of the people they go after are the poor. They're easier targets. But one of the factors they forget as they move up the ladder and start charging more and more middle-class people is that these people aren't nearly as likely to buy their con. They are much more resistant to being intimidated because they aren't government wards. And they have more money for such things as lawyers and private investigators. If you do, by all means hire one to investigate everybody involved, especially the worker, the counselors (especially the counselors), the guardian ad litem, the foster parents who have your child, etc. You'll be surprised how much evidence of naked bias you'll find in such an investigation. It's legal, and it's your right. If you find something, by all means use it.

15. Don't willingly surrender the children: Don't ever willingly surrender the children. To do so gives them the whip hand. Anything you can do to keep the children out of their hands stops them from being able to hold them for ransom (you’re hopping thru hoops).

16. Don't do anything that puts you under the control of DHS/CPS/DCFS: Don't willingly move out of the home on DHS/CPS/DCFS demand, or do anything that puts the family under DHS/CPS/DCFS control (see don't sign anything, above). When they get control, they go wild.

17. Fight them, tooth and nail: Don't ever give up. One of my favorite pictures is of a heron that is trying to swallow a frog headfirst while the frog has his "hands" firmly around the heron's throat. That, for me, is the picture I want to convey to you. Don't ever give up your quest to keep, or regain your children from these vicious and evil people who have a demonstrated anti-family bias. True, many DHS/CPS/DCFS workers are honestly trying to do the best they can for the children, and there is still a lot of child abuse for them to work on. But their incessant pursuit of demonstrably innocent families takes money and manpower away from their ability to pursue other families.

African American Fatherhood and Marriage
By
Ronald E. Smith


While the epitome of the American thought pattern as it relates to the African American male role and his own view of fatherhood and marriage is disdain, ambivalence and a refusal to accept responsibility, we make these assumptions based on our inability to comprehend that the roles that most African American males are now taking were relegated and structured through policy and procedure enacted by a profit driven government with total disregard for the long term affect.
African American males are depicted as shuffling, criminals dodging responsibility having a need for governmental intervention to assist him to do what he is supposed to do to be considered a responsible citizen in society. While the responsibility of repair and education of the absent father has been taken on by the establishment, it is the same establishment that perpetuates this situation. One of the reasons why the male has responded to responsibility in the manner that it currently does has a basis in the social programs enacted during previous administrations which outlined social welfare programs and its benefits with the stipulation that the male maintained a residence anywhere except within the household of his children.
Although many experts have researched and studied this population, and does relay them extremely close to accurate, we must ascertain that the validity of these claims have been nothing more than theory. Bill Cosby makes a valid argument of the state of African American fathers and the family however; his contention lacks the realization that his motivation and offered solutions does not approach the root of the problem.
We ask, what does the root of this problem consists of and why is the relationship between African American males, females and their children dictating a rise in single parenthood in America? Our answer begins with the ethnocentric values of mainstream America with goals and objectives which relegate legislation which undermines every subgroup which has in effect created a subculture that includes members from every walk of life. This being said it brings us to the conclusion, in this case, that the assumptions and expert opinions directed at the African American male is currently becoming the view that society holds for males in general. This however does not explain the root of the problem. It simply points out that the plight of the African American male is also becoming the problem of society as a whole.
The root problem is a destructive mechanism which has changed the thought pattern of African American men from breadwinners to victims. The root problem stems from Americas treatment and assassination of the male role model, passing legislation directed at minorities which has stripped African American men of their ability to maintain relationships not only with the opposite sex but also with their offspring. Even today when an African American male is stopped by a policeman for a minor traffic infraction, he runs the risk, especially if his wife or partner is with him, of humiliation, degradation and disparaging treatment. This is not to say that this is the norm, as I pointed out this is a distinct possibility.
The civil rights movement of the 1950’s and 60’s had the overt illusion of the promotion of opportunity but failed to offer a mechanism to eradicate the mentality that had been garnered from centuries of destructive personal, physical and character assassinations of every African American male. Although opportunity afforded itself, the prerequisite to take full advantage of the opportunities were not present. Some members of this group, just as during the slavery era, were strong enough to take advantage of opportunity despite the lack of America’s inability to transform its mentality. In other words, the rules changed but the players didn’t.
Conversely, legislation which included stipulations such as, “The no man in the house rule,” was instituted to assist the family only if the African American father “disappeared”. Further legislation has made the male in general a profit bearing entity to state government based on his absence which has in turn harvested several institutions nationwide whose covert objective is the destruction of the male relationship with both his partner and his children.
Fatherlessness is perpetuated by the dollars generated from the federal level to state government consequently; state government utilizes the theme of “protection of the children” in its quest to retrieve federal dollars. It is profitable to the state for the father to be absent. The state continues to support and initiate programs that are profitable but destructive to fathers and the family.
Governments attempt to strengthen marriage is in actuality a band-aid on the elephant. Initiatives to promote healthy marriages appear to be governments attempt to rectify the situation, however in close view it is simply just another method for government to funnel dollars to its cronies.
Robert Rector Senior Research Fellow at The Heritage Foundation in his testimony Before the Sub-committee on Human Resources
Of the Committee on Ways and Means
U.S. House of Representatives included the following points:

President George W. Bush has proposed—as part of welfare reform reauthorization—the creation of a pilot program to promote healthy and stable marriage. Funding for the program would be small-scale: $300 million per year. This sum represents one penny to promote healthy marriage for every five dollars government currently spends to subsidize single parenthood.

The following are important points about the healthy marriage initiative:
• The program would be focused on early intervention, helping young adult couples establish stable and healthy relationships before the conception and birth of a child.
• Participation in the program would be strictly voluntary.
• Although there is much chatter about an alleged shortage of marriageable males as a barrier to marriage, in reality, nearly half of unmarried mothers are living with the child’s father at the time a child is born; another 23 percent are in a stable romantic relationship with the father. A shortage of “marriageable men” is not a major obstacle to marriage promotion.
• Over 95 percent of unmarried fathers worked during the year of the child’s birth; their median annual earnings were $17,500.(This is higher than the mothers’ earnings.)Drug and alcohol abuse among these fathers is rare.
• Marriage can have a dramatic effect in reducing child poverty. If poor single mothers were married to the fathers of their children, nearly 70 percent would be immediately lifted out of poverty.
• Some argue that the key to increasing marriage in low income communities is to provide job training to increase the wages and employment of fathers. One problem with this approach is that government job training programs generally have a very limited impact on employment and earnings. More importantly, data from the Fragile Families survey show that increasing fathers’ employment and earnings will have only a marginal effect in increasing marriage. Improving attitudes and relationship skills will have a far greater impact.
The problem here is that most who offer an opinion as to what and how the problem of fatherlessness in the African American community can be corrected are neither a father nor African American. Most of the funding for the Healthy Marriage program did not go to Minority Organizations. This is synonymous with a dog teaching a cat how to be a cat.
The next problem is that government continues to spend more money promoting fatherlessness than it does to promote the involvement of the father. Current funding streams have not been targeted to assist in the restructuring of families but have been directed and labeled as welfare reform which has a net affect of suicide for the family structure.
African American men are generally extremely willing to be fathers to their offspring however they are systematically removed by a system that holds profit margins through destructive methods more important than giving the assistance to keep the father and child relationships strong. The overall mentality among the African American population is that the mother will fare much better simply receiving monetary assistance absent a positive relationship with the male as opposed to the offering of assistance only when that father is involved.
While government claims that the benefits of marriage and family values in this community has a direct affect on the economic and moral standards, it thrives from removing children, ostracizing and penalizing fathers which drives a wedge between men and women and destroys the family structure.

For the past four decades, our government has continued to pass legislation that has slowly taken away our power as people to maintain our family relationships. Instead of assisting our families to address the problems that we all face, governments’ answer has been to take our families apart and destroy the relationships of Parents. Grandparents, Aunts, Uncles, Nieces, Nephews, Cousins and the entire family structure as a whole. They have taken away our ability to discipline our children by medicating them with the net result of undisciplined children committing violence in the streets of our major cities. They have utilized a variety of methods to accomplish this goal with all methods being profitable. The bottom line is that government has put our children up for sale. This Peaceful Protest will address every destructive method:



CPS – Government has given the Child Protective Service Agency the ability to come into the homes of our nation’s families, take our children and sell them on the adoption stage. Instead of using its funding to assist and repair our nation’s families, they are selling our children to strangers and paying private agencies to do so.



Dissolved Marriages – Government has given our courts the ability to award our children as if they were prizes to one parent or the other with total disregard for the relationships destroyed with the NON CUSTODIAL PARENT or that biological side of the child’s family. This includes Grandparents, Aunts, Uncles, Nieces, Nephews, Cousins and Siblings. With virtually no regard to Shared Parenting one parent in most divorced cases becomes a visitor with their children. This nation’s family law attorneys have built a thriving business by driving a wedge between divorcing couples which destroys the relationship between two individuals who should be urged to work together which is in the best interest of the ­FAMILY Most, if not all of these attorneys accomplish this at a rate of about $200.00 per hour.



Child Support Enforcement – Government has given this agency the power to incarcerate, suspend professional licenses, driving privileges, destroy credit ratings, and criminalize non custodial parents. Instead of assisting parents to reach their obligatory goals, they are punishing parents who may lose a job or become ill or any reason other than refusal to pay. All parents are not dead beat most of them are DEAD BROKE.



Domestic Violence – Government has given the courts the ability to destroy relationships between parent and child when allegations are made and prior to a sufficient investigation. While we stand in support of fighting domestic violence, we believe that false allegations should carry sanctions.



Friend of the Court – Government has given this agency the power to declare a parent as abandoning their children during the divorce process. Divorcing couples are not abandoning their children, and the FOC should foster an ongoing, parental relationship between both parents and their offspring. The practices of FOC, is profitable to the system.



Paternity Fraud – Government has allowed its state agencies to collect child support from a parent even after DNA testing proves that this particular person is not biologically connected to the child. Their reason is that if you have a relationship with a child, you have an obligation. That obligation concludes at financial responsibility. We need government to find the responsible parent and have that parent step up to the plate and stop robbing people to pay for children that does not belong to them biologically. We encourage these people to maintain a relationship but we protest government taking their money wrongfully. And of course, to collect from a person even though that person has been proven not to be the parent is profitable to the system.





These are the issues that we as a collective group who are peacefully protesting change in the way government does business with this nation’s families. We are protesting to put an end to the destruction of family relationships for profit by this government’s systems. We ask you all to donate for mass transportation whether it be; $5.00, $50.00 or $500 every contribution will help achieve our goal of bringing 250,000 people together on August 18, 2007. After your donation, pack your suitcase and board a bus at a location in your hometown and join us all in Washington.





Just like a friend who comes to visit you and just won’t leave:



GOVERNMENT HAS COME INTO OUR HOUSEHOLDS AND WE WANT THEM OUT!!!!!!

Foster Care is a profit-driven Industry that preys on those who offer the least resistance. In the case of NYC: poor Blacks and Latinos.
Children are Kidnaped (the criminal enterprise uses the feel-good euphemism "remove") under any imaginable excuse, Kept with Legal Trickery and eventually Sold. The Kidnapers are the so-called CPS (Children Protective Services) Division of ACS; the Hostage Keepers are the Foster Care agencies; and the ones who Sell them, as Slaves are and were Sold, are the Adoption Agencies. All of them Profit from this Scheme.
This Racketeering Scheme has at least two levels of operation. At a lower level is a money making machine, but at a higher level is a mechanism of Social Control and Population Control.
At the lower level, almost everyone involved in this scheme is motivated by the money rewards: the more Children they Kidnap, the more the business expands, the greater the possibilities of promotion; the longer that they can Keep the Children Hostages, the more money they make, not only with the Children, but also with the endless Services the Parents are Forced to Take in the Hope of ever getting their Children back. ACS and the Foster Care Agencies count with the unconditional backing of the so-called Family Judges and the so-called Law Guardians. The vast majority of the executioners of this scheme, claim that they are "just doing their job". They claim that they are unable to see beyond their noses, and do not see the ultimate consequences of their actions, nor do they have the Moral/Ethical values to refuse to do something that is a Gross Human Rights Violation, and thus a Crime Against Humanity.
The Foster Care Industry is a continuation of the Old System of Slavery, but implemented in a subtle way. It openly violates the 13th Amendment against Slavery and Involuntary Servitude and that is why is applied on Blacks with the addition of Latinos. Children of Blacks and Latinos are treated as Chattel, and that is why it avoids Children of other ethnic groups. Less than 1% Innocent White Children also fall in the hands of the Beast, and most of them are either very poor, or their Parents have life-styles that question the mechanisms of control of the Beast: homeschoolers, vegetarians, vegans, natural living conditions, anti-vaccinations, etc.
The Slow Silent Genocide of Black and Latino Children in New York City by ACS (Administration for Children's Services) is the result of carefully designed Social Engineering with a very specific purpose: African American and Latinos are no longer the minority but together the Majority in New York City, so the "Beast" with legal trickery has designed a very clever but evil way to keep us away from getting was is rightfully ours.

According to the Merriam-Webster Dictionary the meaning of the word:

Kid·nap
Etymology: probably back-formation from kidnapper, from kid + obsolete napper thief
: to seize and detain or carry away by unlawful force or fraud and often with a demand for ransom

This Describes Exactly what the so-called "Children Protective Services" Do

Euphemisms
Feel-good words used by the Beast to hide their crimes and deceive the dummies. It is very important not to allow Anyone to define Your Words and Thoughts. If You allow Your Enemy to define You and Your Reality through the use of euphemisms, You will not be able to see Reality, but rather take their fabricated and artificial reality as the Real One. Remember, Whoever defines the parameters of the issue, controls the issue, and thus has already Won. Here are some of those words used by the Beast to try to Deceive You:
 Remove for Kidnap
 Foster Care for Hostage Keeping and Slaves' Profiteering
 Best Interest of the Child for Best Interest of the Foster Care Industry
 Law Guardians for Lethal Guardians (they are the Children's worst nightmare; the only thing they "Guard" are the business interest of this racketeering enterprise, making sure that Children stay as long as possible in Foster Care and that eventually their Parents' Rights are terminated).
 Family Court for Institutionalized System of Injustice (their only role is to rubber-stamp ACS and Foster Care agencies crimes and give an aura of "legality" to this criminal enterprise)
 Adoption for Slaves Sale. The vast majority of Adoptions are Forced and Illegal. These Children being Sold to the highest Bidder have Parents who desperatelly want them back.
 Children's Rights for Right to Remove the Natural and Best Protectors of Children: their Parents. This of course to leave Children Defenseless and thus at the mercy of their army of Predators.
Facts in New York City
 There are 18,000 innocent Children Kidnaped and kept Prisoners by ACS in New York City.
 98% of those Children are Black & Latino. 1% of Innocent White Children also fall in the hands of the Beast.
 The CPS Division of ACS is the Greatest Child Abuser in NYC: for every Child they Save, they Destroy 1000. Either Moron's Logic or Clever Evil Social Engineering.
 8,000 of those Children are up for "Adoption" (Euphemism for Sale, as Slaves were Sold). ACS has already sold 24,000 children in the last 5 years against their parents wishes.
 75% of those Children end in prison. That's why Prison building is booming. Most of the rest end as Homeless or Mentally ill.
 About 35 Innocent Children die in NYC every year while under ACS.
 It is a 2.3 Billion a year business: $60,000 per Child per year. The lion's share of the Foster Care Mill goes to Catholic Charities, while other denominations share the spoils.
 The Foster Care Agencies receive from 5K to 7.5K commission for every Child they Sell.
 Family Court Judges are appointed & reappointed by the Mayor & Work for Him. The ones who do not follow the scheme are not re-appointed as with Judge Philip C. Segal in Brooklyn Family Court, or harrazed as Judge Margarita Lopez.
 It takes about 4 1/2 years the process in Family Court but the new ASFA law puts Children for adoption after 15 months in Foster Care: a lose-lose situation designed to facilitate the Slaving of Our Children.
 The Chances of Parents ever winning a case against ACS is 1.6% (including appeals, according to the Office of the Public Advocate). There is no Jury or Due Process.
 A generous estimate is that the Chances of Parents winning the 1028 Hearing is 2 out of every 1000 cases (here it's decided if the child was properly kidnaped): A Circus.
 ACS Kidnaps Our Children to Sell Them! A new Form of Slavery.
 ACS and Public Schools Team together to Place Our Brightest Children in Special Ed where they are given drugs such as Ritalin, Concerta, etc, to shrink their Brains & Destroy Them
 Family Court Judges force a lawyer on the children: the so-called Law Guardians from the Legal Aid Society, who are our children worst nightmare.
 ACS allows the Foster Care agencies to use Foster Care Children as Guinea Pigs for Toxic and even Lethal Drug Experiments, many times without even the consent of the Parents.
Where are Our Elected Officials who are Silent about, this Genocide? Are They Also on the Take?

We have identified 6 components of the Child Exploitation Complex (the Beast), although there may be more:
I- The Business with Disease Industry,
II- Public Schooling Industry
III- Child Kidnapping Industry
IV- Family Court Industry
V- Foster Care Industry
VI- Adoption Industry

Analysis
These 6 components of the Beast although present all the time, exercise their attack in the life of a Child in the chronological order in which we presented them above. 75% of those Children who don't die while in Foster Care are eventually placed in the Prison Industrial Complex (where they lose their right to vote, to participate in the decision making process; while being there some are legally "lynched"), while some are sold to the Adoption Industry, which is rapidly growing since the passage of the new Adoption and Safe Families Act (ASFA). Everything is in place to destroy the Family, the Social Unit of society. Under the excuse of protecting Children a system to destroy them and their Families has been set in place: anything that destroys the Family is not only "legal" but even encouraged; and anything to preserve the Family is "illegal", persecuted, prosecuted and discouraged. A real Alice in Wonderland thought process. Real "Double Thought" by "Big Brother".