May 4, 2008 by Walter Schneider.

“This message arrived from France. Please circulate it throughout the world. One never knows ……

Please look at the photo below [shown at right], read the mother’s message and circulate it to all the people you know.

‘My 13-year old daughter, Ashley Flores, disappeared two weeks ago.

It may be that if everyone who sees this  message forwards it on, someone may see this child.

This is how a child from Steven Point was found, by circulating her photograph and by even showing it on television.

Internet is circulated even overseas, South America, Canada etc.

Please forward this message to all your  contacts.

Please God, this child will be found.

I implore everyone to please circulate this picture as best possible.

It is not too late.

PLEASE HELP US!

If any one can supply any information, please contact me at :

HelpfindAshleyFlores@yahoo.com

Included is a photograph of my daughter. All your prayers will be so precious!’

It will only take 2 minutes to circulate this message.

If it was your child you would do everything possible to obtain help!!”

___________________________

Questo messaggio arriva dalla Francia. Fate circolare in tutto il mondo. Non si
sa mai…..

Per favore guardate la foto qui sotto [indicato alla destra],
leggete il messaggio della madre e fate circolare a tutte le persone di vostra conoscenza….

Mia figlia di 13 anni, Ashley Flores, est scomparsa da due settimane.

Può succedere che se tutti fanno girare questo messaggio, qualcuno vedrà questa bambina.

Così facendo una bambina scomparsa di Steven Point è stata ritrovata anche facendo circolare la sua foto alla televisione.

Internet circola anche oltre-mare, in Sud America, Canada ecc.

Per favore fate inoltrate questo messaggio a tutte le persone della vostra rubrica.

Grazie a Dio e a tutto ciò che di spirituale esiste, questa bambina sarà ritrovata.

Chiedo a tutti, supplico tutti, per favore, di far girare il più possibile questa immagine.

Non è ancora troppo tardi.

PER FAVORE AIUTATECI

Chiunque sia in grado di dare delle informazioni al riguardo, per favore mi contatti :

HelpfindAshleyFlores@yahoo.com

Includo la foto di mia figlia . Tutte le vostre preghiere saranno preziose !!!

Sono sufficienti 2 minuti per far circolare il messaggio.

Se si trattasse di vostro figlio farete l’impossibile per ottenere dell’aiuto !!!

Posted in Child Abduction | Print | No Comments »

May 2, 2008 by Walter Schneider.

Any man who believes in that feminist-inspired hoax is in for a rude awakening.

The following article is a slightly edited version of one that was posted to the F4L mailing list 2003 10 07.

You may have seen the last part of this message already, maybe not, because my copy of the message containing that, which I posted very early this morning, hasn’t come back to me yet. Perhaps the snoopers aren’t done with it yet. If that’s the case, I hope they enjoy what they read. Still, the delay puzzles me. I’m not even on the hit-list of Status of Women Canada.

The preamble in the following is a commentary I used to introduce the forwarded statistics to someone who is not on this list. I hope it sweetens things a bit if you should receive the statistics a second time now. If you wish to forward the message, go ahead. It contains no secrets that need to be guarded.

The issues of concern in this article relate to unhappiness caused by controlling and violent women in marriages that never broke up.

The appended statistics relate to the consequences of men’s status and position of “power” in society. They show that women are not stepping up to the plate in equitable numbers. The problems inherent in the forwarded statistics and explained in the related web pages were not caused just by feminists all by their lonesome selves.

It wasn’t even just feminists and women who caused those problems. If things are to change for the better, men have to come to acknowledge a major share of the guilt.

I wonder how many men permanently damaged their backs by living up to the Hollywood stereotype that carries a bride across the threshold. However, that is only a small one of many manifestations of the problem.  A multitude of methods have been devised and are being used by which men’s backs are being broken, literally and figuratively.

One of my friends led a down-trodden existence for the duration of his long marriage. He pampered and coddled his wife and became a total slave to her and their two boys, because she was given to having frequent heart attacks. I must have heard at least 30 times during the last 25 years that she had only six months left to live.

She could produce “heart attacks” at will – no kidding – and used them rigorously to get her way. The consequence was that she literally exercised and shaped only her bottom by permanently sitting on it and from that throne firmly controlled all other family-members’ activities and minds.

Full Story

Posted in Health, Men's Issues, Family, Child Abduction | Print | No Comments »

May 2, 2008 by Walter Schneider.

The Times (Britain)
1 May 2008

Vengeful mothers leave good fathers powerless to see child, says judge
By Rosemary Bennett, Social Affairs Correspondent

A senior judge spoke out against child access law yesterday, saying that
the courts were powerless to help decent fathers to see their children if
vengeful mothers stood in the way….(Full Story)

Posted in Divorce, Child-Custody Awards, Feminist Jurisprudence, Child Abduction | Print | No Comments »

April 12, 2008 by Walter Schneider.

Ms JW wrote:

Please can you explain how Quebec Laws allow fathers and mothers who wish to avoid paying child support emigrate to your beautiful country.

Why is Quebec not part of the REMO treaty with the UK and other countries of the world.

Or hopefully I am totally wrong and you can kindly give me the contact of the correct office to contact and claim maintenance as his father has run away and RETIRED to your country.

Thanking you kindly

Ms JW

Hello Ms JW,

The short answers are, no, I can’t explain it but can only speculate on it, and, yes, I can direct you to sources of the information you seek.  However, there is also a more fundamental question that you perhaps should have asked but did not.  Why do laws exist that force expunged parents (usually fathers) to pay for “crimes” they did not commit, for children whom they cannot see, and for divorces they did not want or deserve?

Here are the long answers.

I neither reside in Quebec nor speak French.  Therefore I am not very familiar with child-support enforcement rules in Quebec and  don’t have precise and certain answer to your questions, but it appears to me that Canada has a reciprocal agreement with the UK, in relation to the enforcement of the collection of child support.  I do not know that Quebec is exempt from that international agreement.

If Quebec is not part of that agreement, that could be because family- and divorce law in English-speaking Canada and in Quebec evolved differently over time.  In English-speaking Canada, jurisprudence is based on English Common Law, while in Quebec, jurisprudence is based on the Code Napoleon.  That the evolution of family laws diverged somewhat in various portions of Canada is entirely possible and even a fact, as those laws are largely provincial and not federal matters.

However, that there is a difference such as that which concerns you seems somewhat incongruous.  With the aid of lavish and enormously generous government funding derived from taxes paid by all Canadian income earners who were generally totally unaware of the socially destructive unconstitutional laws with which they were about to be hit, the domination and control of Canadian jurisprudence by father- and family-hostile law societies and interest groups were foisted on Canada in the 1960s (e. g.: “no-fault” divorce against the wishes of the other partner in an ostensibly life-long contract, and the legalization of extortion for the financing of the filching of the children of the non-custodial parent - usually the father).

Quebec jurisprudence is even more rabidly father- and family-hostile than is the case in English-speaking Canada and other developed nations.  It is incomprehensible that the feminist interest groups and the feminist lawmakers that drive the increasingly totalitarian, anti-family family laws in Canada would have overlooked Quebec as a source of profit to be derived from reciprocal child-support enforcement procedures for the UK and Canada.  Still, it is possible - however unlikely - that the lawmakers (i. e.: legislators) in Quebec refused to be railroaded into the feminist-desired unconstitutional changes to Canadian family law to the extent that such changes were considered and advertised in international agreements for child-support enforcement.  After all, such laws are a nationa shame.

I suggest that you ask your lawyer the question of why it would be that Quebec is exempt and that you change lawyers if he hasn’t got the answer.

Failing that, you may wish to direct your inquiries to some family-rights organizations in Quebec, although the best avenue of success would probably be to go directly to the Quebec government or to the Canadian Embassy.  The most obvious agency that should be able to provide you with the information you seek would be the one you should contact through the web page that you perhaps visited already: http://www.csa.gov.uk/en/case/remo.asp

I copied your information request and my answers to some other pro-family and pro-father activists.  Perhaps they will provide more precise information.

Permit me to ask questions.  Did either you or your ex-husband break your marriage contract against the objections of the other parent of your children?  After separation and divorce, did you regularly and equitably share access to and custody of your children?

If your separation and divorce were the outcome of a mutual agreement between you and him, and if child access and -custody were shared equitably while the father was still present in the UK, then there was really no need for a child-support order.  There would then not even have been any motivation for the father of your children to “avoid paying child support [and to] emigrate” to Canada, right?  After all, what motivation would there be to escape from something that doesn’t exist?

It appears to me that the father of the children you had by him quite possibly and naturally tried to escape the paying of extortion money for goods and services he can’t enjoy.

Regards,

Walter Schneider
http://fathersforlife.org

Posted in Child-Custody Awards, Family, Feminist Jurisprudence, Child Abduction | Print | No Comments »

April 7, 2008 by Walter Schneider.

Dr. Albert Mohler’s blog features an entry today that is very favorable of Stephen Baskerville’s book “Taken into Custody”, a damning expose of the widespread corruption in the government-designed and -run divorce industry: a conglomerate of racketeering involving not only legislators, judges, prosecutors, social workers, police and bureaucrats but also a host of private-industry adjuncts to the government’s sector of the divorce industry, namely: child-support enforcement and similar agencies (in whom many politicians have a vested interest); psychologists; psychiatrists; mediators; lawyers; bar associations; law societies; universities; journalists; reporters and other interests in the media, and so on.

As Professor Stephen Baskerville describes in his book, all of those parties, especially those connected with the family-court system, conspire to intrude and insert themselves into families - even into the most intimate parts of family life - to expunge loving fathers from their families and their children’s lives, to apprehend and control children for the purpose of financially and emotionally devasting fathers (but not exclusively just fathers), to control women (for example, so as to dictate to women that they must choose between being married to the fathers of their children or to lose their children).

“Taken into Custody provides overwhelming evidence that a major reason for the existence and cancerous growth of what Dr. Albert Mohler calls the “Divorce Industrial Complex,” is the overwhelming greed and corruption that permeates the divorce industry.

“Taken into Custody” was popular from the time the first printing was released in the summer of 2007, but even now, quite a few months later, its popularity and appeal are still growing.  Last night the reader reviews at amazon.com for “Taken into Custody” numbered 37. This morning their number had increased to 41, all of them favorable and five-star rated. The most remarkable thing about those reviews is that amongst them is not a single one written by a family- or father-hostile feminist.  Just a few years ago that would have been unimaginable, while a dozen years ago Stephen Baskerville would have had a very serious problem with finding a publisher willing to produce and distribute his book.

The vast majority of the reader reviews originated in the USA, but quite a few are from reviewers in other countries, such as the U.K., Sweden, Australia and one with an origin identified as “International”.

There is apparently as of yet no review by a Canadian reader. I should have written one, but have not yet finished reading the book, having received it, finally, and after two inexplicably failed attempts, just a couple of days ago.  I will make up for my missing review as soon as I am through reading “Taken into Custody.”

The fundamental issues discussed in “Taken into Custody” are not exclusive to the USA.  They are endemic of all English-speaking nations (as Stephen Baskerville identified with numerous examples and citations pertaining to many of those nations).  Still, they are applicable to - to mention a few such nations other than the USA - Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Finland, the countries of the former Soviet block, India, Japan, Egypt, Spain, Italy, France, Holland, Germany, Canada, South Africa, and so on.  The preceding list of countries is based on what is being reported to and discussed with me by fathers and by pro-father- and pro-family activists from around the world.

If you haven’t yet obtained a copy of “Taken into Custody”, get one, and you will find out that - if you dare to dream of having a family - civil rights and liberties are only an illusion.  You will also find out that families make up the fabric of society, and that society is being destroyed when governments engage on a deliberate war designed to rip families apart.

As I am reading “Taking into Custody,” I cannot help but feel that the views I have held for years are confirmed.  We managed in the ostensibly “free” West to install absolute totalitarianism by the government bureaucracy.

Posted in Shared Parenting, Men's Issues, Divorce, Media Bias, Child-Custody Awards, Family, Propaganda Exposed, Feminism, Feminist Jurisprudence, Child Abduction | Print | No Comments »

March 14, 2008 by Walter Schneider.

HumanEvents.com
Children of the State
by Joseph A. D’Agostino (more by this author)
Posted 03/03/2008 ET

There is no such thing as other people’s children. — Hillary Clinton

Conservative Americans fancy that socialism has been largely defeated or that its greatest remaining threat lies in taxation and spending. They forget that the dream of leftist revolutionaries for centuries has been not only to equalize wealth and social status, but to eliminate all distinctions among the citizens of their ideal republic. All of these revolutionaries from Marx on down have targeted the family for destruction…(Full Story)

That article in Human Events contains an excellent and important review of Stephen Baskerville’s book, Taken Into Custody: The War Against Fathers, Marriage, and the Family.

____________
Note: Hillary Clinton’s aphorism for the concept of state-ownership and control of children is fairly recent and not all that well known.  Its historical form, used by communists for more than a century to promote totalitarian state-control of society, is familiar to far more people and is a long-standing staple of feminist dialectics: “There are no illegitimate children.”  That means that all children, regardless of the marital status of their parents but especially those children who are full orphans or — primarily on account of  divorce or separation of their parents — semi-orphans, are the full responsibility not of their parents (except for the paying) but of the state and of all of society.

It is only a short step from that to the claim by many social reformers that any conceivable grouping of people constitutes a family, in the words of the former German family minister, Ulla Schmidt, the then new SPD-health-minister in Berlin: “Family is, if all eat out of the same refrigerator.”

Stephen Baskerville explores the concept of state-ownership and control of children in one of his articles: “Hillary and the Politics of Children” (Human Events, 2007 01 24)

Posted in Family, Feminism, The New World Order, Child Abduction | Print | No Comments »

February 28, 2008 by Walter Schneider.

Daily Mail [UK]
How social services are paid bonuses to snatch babies for adoption
By SUE REID, January 31, 2008

From the article:

….over the five years since I began investigating the scandal of forced adoptions, I have found a deeply secretive system which is too often biased against basically decent families.

I have been told of routine dishonesty by social workers and questionable evidence given by doctors which has wrongly condemned mothers.

Meanwhile, millions of pounds of taxpayers’ money has been given to councils to encourage them to meet high Government targets on child adoptions.

Under New Labour policy, Tony Blair changed targets in 2000 to raise the number of children being adopted by 50 per cent to 5,400 a year.

The annual tally has now reached almost 4,000 in England and Wales - four times higher than in France, which has a similar-sized population….

(Full Story)

More information on the apprehension of children by the State
It is a fallacy that adopted children do better.  The outcomes in adopted children is on average as dismal as it is in children who grow up fatherless.  The best outcomes by far are to be found in those children that grow up in the care of two married parents (one of each sex) who live under a common roof.

And here are a few thoughts on the circumstances of child apprehensions:

The thing about all of this that should be of the greatest concern to those concerned about the escalating centralization of power, growing totalitarianism and outright tyranny in all developed nations should be that child apprehensions by the state escalate in one particular sector of the population.  That is single-mother families that never had or no longer have the protection of the fathers of the children in those families.

Should anyone be surprised?  Why?  The war by governments against the family in the developed nations is real and has been escalating ever since so-called “no-fault” divorce (in which the fault is always the man’s) became the rule in the late sixties and early seventies. The easiest and most effective method by which to destroy families is to break and remove their weakest links, the fathers.

Posted in Family, The New World Order, Child Abduction | Print | No Comments »

December 26, 2007 by Walter Schneider.

“When motherhood gets you jail time” (a Dec. 19, 2007 TIME Story) and “Choosing jail over joint custody” (also a Dec. 19, 2007 TIME Story) comprise a two-part series.

The first of those stories was ranked this morning the most popular story, most-often e-mailed-by-readers-of-Time. Half an hour later, at 8:30 a.m., the rank for the story had dropped to 3rd place in the list, right after “Who Is Killing Mexico’s Musicians?” and “Spain’s Holiday Cry: Down With Santa!”.

Given the high level of interest in the price to be paid for motherhood, it is important to note that “When motherhood gets you jail time” is a misnomer.

Still, even though inaccurate, that headline was a good choice by TIME, a choice that was bound to manufacture concern for the mother (who nevertheless wants to use her motherhood for criminal intents) and accounted for the story’s high popularity ranking. The second story with the more objective and mundane title “Choosing jail over joint custody” evoked far less concern and resulted in the second story not even ranking in the TIME’s top-25 list.

Yes, motherhood, apple pie and women’s sole right to possession of their children do it every time, they turn criminals into saints. Women’s obligations and the rights of children and fathers come in distant last.

The mother for whom the TIME manufactered concern chose jail over revealing the whereabouts of a son to the boy’s alleged father. The mother had apparently thought that having a child, if not through immaculate conception but then at least without a father being a part of that child’s life (she even decided that the boy should not have his alleged father’s name) entitled her to government support payments. It normally would, but in Wisconsin not without a paternity test having been done to ascertain that the fingered man is actually the biological father of that boy she had.

The two stories in TIME, neither the popular first one nor the unpopular second one whose headline proclaimed that the budding welfare mom is breaking the law by interfering with a court order, did not report whether the expunged father is in truth the biological father or whether DNA tests proving his paternity were even done.

That would seem to be an extremely important issue from a practical viewpoint, but from the perspective of sainted motherhood, apple pie and Christmas it is not.

Let’s get real. The mother should be in jail at least until she quits breaking the law. Society should be kept safe from such women. It is unfortunate that it costs far more to keep such a welfare mom in jail than it does to simply put her on the dole, but in the long run it would be far cheaper for society to jail her and to keep her there until she no longer engages in her crime of defying a court order that grants a father access to his child. It seems that the vast majority of women would choose freedom of movement over their perceived right to choose to refuse to comply with court orders that grant visitation rights to alleged or real fathers of children.

The name of the criminal mother is April Griffin, not Virgin Mary. No amount of manufacturing concern by Time or by anyone else will change that.

Nevertheless, we should get to know whether the alleged father of the adamantly hidden child is truly the bio-dad. On average, chances are one in three that he isn’t. That is not just a minor detail, it is the major issue in the case. Could that be the reason why April Griffin is hiding the boy — to avoid incriminating herself in having committed the crime of paternity fraud?

–Walter

Posted in Media Bias, Shared Parenting, The New World Order, Child Abduction, Paternity Fraud | Print | No Comments »

January 21, 2007 by Walter Schneider.

——– Original Message ——–
Subject: [Mention] New Book Coming: “Taken Into Custody”
Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2007 23:13:57 -0500
From: Stephen Baskerville

Please forward this message to your lists.

I recently signed a contract with a current affairs publisher for a book tentatively entitled Taken Into Custody: The War Against Fathers, Marriage, and the Family. This will be a major exposé on all facets of the divorce/custody machine — including child custody, constitutional rights, child support, domestic violence, child abuse, feminism, government fatherhood/marriage programs, and more. It will document the politics behind the machinery — the conflicts of interest, the corruption, the money, the extremist ideology — and demonstrate why this is more than simple “gender bias” against fathers.

Taken Into Custody will be the most comprehensive and forthright exposé yet published by a major publishing house of the depredations of the divorce industry. I say this conscious that I am standing on the shoulders of others: Sanford Braver’s Divorced Dads: Shattering the Myths, Warren Farrell’s Father and Child Reunion (among his other books), Jeffery Leving’s Fathers Rights, Jed Abraham’s From Courtship to Courtroom, Robert Seidenberg’s The Fathers Emergency Guide to Divorce-Custody Battle, Richard Doyle’s Save the Males, Judy Parejko’s Stolen Vows, and others.

Without these pioneering efforts, I would never have been able to write this book. Yet these writers were either pressured by their publishers to tone down their language or forced to self-publish. This is the first book from a major publisher that has been permitted to speak the unvarnished truth about the divorce machinery: its destruction of families, its violations of the Constitution, its disregard for due process of law, its voracious appetite for children, parents, and families. This is no tirade however but a thoroughly documented study of the most repressive government machine ever created in the United States.

For examples of the kind of forthright account you can expect in this book, look at the published articles at www.stephenbaskerville.net.

Taken Into Custody is scheduled for publication in July for $24.95, but you can order it now for a special pre-publication price of $16.47 at Amazon.

I would be grateful if you would please place these links on your web sites and forward this message to everyone on your lists.

Stephen Baskerville

Stephen Baskerville, PhD
President
American Coalition for Fathers & Children
1718 M Street, NW, Suite 187
Washington, DC 20036
www.acfc.org
info@acfc.org
800-978-DADS (3237)

For more than 70 articles and studies in mainstream publications on the abuses of the divorce industry, see www.stephenbaskerville.net.

Posted in Shared Parenting, Child-Custody Awards, Men's Issues, Divorce, Education, Family, Feminist Jurisprudence, Child Abduction, The New World Order, Propaganda Exposed, Feminism, Paternity Fraud | Print | No Comments »

August 28, 2006 by Walter Schneider.

From the Hansard of the Legislative Assembly of the Parliament of Western Australia, 2006 08 24Two Australian children who had been kidnapped by their mother to Switzerland were found, institutionalized for a year, and then returned to Australia to be reunited with Russell Wood, their Australian father.  However, the Australian Department of Community Development (read “Department of Family and Community Destruction”) then got the assistance of a family-court judge to have the children ordered returned to their kidnapper in Switzerland. (Full Story)

Posted in Child Abduction | Print | No Comments »