Troubled US teens are abducted to Montana or Idaho, for serious re-education camps. Rich parents sign over paternal rights and pay US$ 8500 per month to send their kids away to boot camp institutions that will brain wash and mold the teens with almost no limits.
As much as it looks and feels like a kidnapping, those escorts have the absolute legal right to transport you against your will, even if that means carrying you through the street, handcuffed to hell and back.
There is a legal process where parents can sign over custody of kids who need residential care, […] that same process works for "unruly" teens like me, which meant the company that ran my camp had total legal control over where I went and what I did.
Even phone calls to my grandparents were a privilege I had to earn. I was allowed five minutes, and a staff member sat next to me the entire time, listening in. If during the call I complained about being unhappy, that was "manipulative behavior," and they’d end the call
The Gulag for minors, in the USA!
One night in August 2004, I awoke to a man and a woman in my room whom I had never seen before telling me that they were "escorts" and we were going to a place called "wilderness." I was not allowed to bring any belongings or tell anyone where I was going. I didn’t know what "escorts" and "wilderness" were, and I was terrified. It was like being Liam Neeson’s daughter in Taken, if it had turned out later that Liam Neeson arranged the whole thing.
Kids die in their care, during week long wilderness outings:
Still, at least neither of us died, as happens with some regularity ("untrained staff" and "lack of adequate nourishment" are the leading causes of death). If you’re going to lead children in week-long hikes through the woods, you should know about things like the sun and treating burns. If this kind of shit happened at a Boy Scout camp, you can bet it’d be on the news.
Unbelievable: Google Troubled Teens Boot Camp. Watch the paid ads. and the remaining search results. You can even get loans to pay off the expensive boot camp discipline and indoctrination.
Physical child abuse, to the point of occasional death is legal.
Police were called, the justice secretary office of the state of São Paulo opened an inquiry into the crime of racism against a stand up comedian. 1 One owner of the nightclub was arrested and released on bail. The night club might get closed down. Sanitary authorities were called and the night club’s kitchen was closed. An alien kitchen worker was sent home to get his documentation.
The crime: a racist joke
The crime? Black comedian Felipe Hamachi had called a black musician "monkey". At a comedy show where all guests had signed a waiver, that they are aware that they can be the target of offensive humor and jokes. The musician was not a paying guest and had not signed the waiver. Rather he worked in the show, but had mingled with the paying public. Legal officials stated that the waiver was legally invalid, as nobody can sign away their human rights. A comedian that can not make jukes without offending a large portion of the population should change his profession.
The modern legal system is set to transfer financial resources from men to women. It is stacked against men, in that most accusations of rape, sexual abuse, sexual harassment can instantly ruin a man who, by law, is presumed guilty unless proven innocent. We interview an "Extremist" who says feminist laws have perverted the legal and political system to an extent, that only a serious revolution can undo the damage.
A man, ruined beyond repair, by ex-wife and family court
Wayne Tippett has just two things of any real value left in his life: a 10-year-old car and a granite tombstone.
At 51, Tippett is broken, bankrupt and bunking in the guest room of his parents’ Burlington home after a divorce settlement that’s left him $75,000 in debt and racking up $1,000 more each month.
Today, he’ll appear in court at a default hearing to try to explain why he can’t afford to pay his ex-wife (the couple had no children) $3,300 a month, $16,000 in retroactive alimony and $42,000 of her court costs out of a complex case he himself still doesn’t understand. […]
Facing massive legal bills of his own, Tippett filed for bankruptcy and it was only later, he says, he discovered he’s still on the hook, under bankruptcy laws, for any payments related to the divorce case. That’s left Tippett in arrears that are growing monthly, on the default list of Ontario’s controversial Family Responsibility Office and facing seizure of his driver’s licence, his passport and, in time, a possible jail sentence. Devastated by divorce court
A good man, totally destroyed with absolutely no way out. In normal law, there is bankruptcy as a savior, and certainly debtor’s prison has been abolished long ago. If you cornered a rat Feminists manipulative control of the legal and family court system created a monster that subjugates men. And this exists world wide. In Brazil, soccer players get arrested if they are behind paying US$ 30 000 per month to their ex-wives. No matter if the short-lived soccer career took a hit and his income tanked.
Men are a bunch of lambs that obediently go to slaughter. Like the Jews went to the gas chamber. But it is worse then the Jews in WW II. There is no country persecuted men can flee to and get asylum. Oppressed exploited wage enslaved men are not recognized as persecuted refugees.
Such men can either suffer the rest of their lives in poverty, in the Gulag jail of feminist dictatorship. Or they can act like men and fight back.
Such kind of dictatorship is why the US constitution guarantees the right to bear arms. If you are violated by the government, you have to stand up against the government. Feminist injustice is so deeply entrenched, a violent revolution might be the only solution. The Boston Tea party was for some small taxation issue, not total ruinous exploitation.
Women did their revolution, with female trickery. Manipulative language, whining complaints, male benevolent chivalry, and pure male manipulability removed due process, justice, constitutional rights and freedom. Men were no match for concerted manipulations perpetrated by feminists.
Mr. Tippet above is a prime example how the Land of the Free has become a medieval terror regime.
Men are repressed cradle to grave. In kindergarten and primary school, boys fall behind because female-only teaching staff gears school towards girl’s preferences and punishes boys for being boys. Female indoctrination continues through University, where a terror regime of sexual harassment laws stifles academic freedom and research. .
We do stress that we do not advocate violence. Men should use legal ways to fight for their freedom and human rights.
But most men (or honest women) can understand the enormous hurt or rage that must be boiling in a man whose life got systematically destroyed, with absolutely no way out, by unjust cruel inhumane laws. The proper government, its courts and police are to blame for the unfair persecution ( compare Mr. Emerson).
What are the human rights of a person threatened by the unconstitutional dictatorship of the majority? This is similar to the problem of a man condemned to death by stoning for apostasy from a legally constituted governmental court in Afghanistan. But there are governments opposing stoning for apostasy, but is not a single government in the world publicly opposing egregious human rights violations like debtor’s prison for fathers unable to pay child support, or supporting the freedom of an underage boy forced to pay child support to his female rapist. For a man whose life has been utterly destroyed, maybe the only "non-violent" protest is self-immolation as chosen by a man described below.
A man kills his kids, out of despair and anger for being ruined by government powers, with absolutely no way out to get back a dignified life vs. Feminists unhinge constitutional guarantees because women are "devastated" because of innuendo or compliments
In the week when one father murdered his four children, and another was jailed for life, Lorna Martin investigates the motives and twisted minds of the men Americans call ‘family annihilators’. Are they driven by hatred, revenge or mad, possessive love? […]
Jack was three and Nina four. He strangled them with a pyjama cord and wrapped their bodies in duvets, before placing them in a cellar. […] His body was found hours later at the foot of a block of flats
The Guardian does not understand the immense hurt, and rage, in a man whose entire life is totally destroyed by a selfish vengeful ex-wife. Lose your home, your money, your children, and be indentured slave for life to pay for the convenience of your ex wife. With absolutely no way out. NO bankruptcy, he can not even flee to start a new life in Brazil, because they take away his passport and he will have a criminal and civil record.
None of this, of course, justifies killing the children. Even a terrorist should respect children. That is too low. Even killing his wife, while understandable, misses the real culprit. The legal family court system gives a woman all the power, and suggests to use and abuse that power. A woman needs to have excellent character to resist the temptation to get free money and long time support, as the law offers her.
The real enemy is the law, the feminists who inspired these laws, the legal system, parliament. The lawyers and judges who make a livelihood torturing and robbing men. And the stupid men who let this happen.
So if he had to go on a shooting rampage, the lawyers, judges, and feminist authors that inspired this, would be more deserving targets then his immoral wife who just takes advantage of her legal, though unjust, rights to demand support or to unjustly accuse of sexual violence.
Again, we can not advocate killing and violence. Violence is not the way.
But some serious action is needed to galvanize the resistance, or shake men out of their stupor.
Interestingly, feminists have even devised psychological diagnoses (battered-women-syndrome) to justify premeditated murder of women who always had the option to simply walk away from the allegedly abusive relationship.
Compare this to the men in our examples, that have absolutely no way out to flee decade-long financial exploitation and ruin. Some have life sentences with payment obligations until death!
Men are tough. Mrs. Clinton stated that women are the main victims of war, because the lose brothers, husbands and sons. The maimed or killed men themselves seem to suffer much less then their women.
It is important to compare men’s life threatening troubles to women’s "sensitivities" about tiny inconveniences that elicit pity and support in chivalrous men and a huge legal apparatus to remedy:
Men getting their life destroyed, decades slave labor to pay monthly ransom to ex-wives is considered a trivial. coincidence.
Women getting a clumsy compliment or sexual innuendo, or objectifying gaze, get "devastated", "constantly traumatized, according to the Sexual Harassment Industry, which portrays a social scene where women who experience sexual harassment are "devastated," go through it process of "grieving," and if they are lucky, emerge as "survivors." For obvious reasons, SHI rhetoric maximizes the damage supposedly inflicted on them: Sympathy will be garnered, counseling provided, male wickedness confirmed, and women’s victimhood" (Heterophobia)
153 of the 268 exonerations in the Innocence Project were for rape. This is 57.1 % rape convictions, we found in a search of the innocence project for "Rape". A large number was due to eyewitness misidentification. People freed by DNA testing are freed because the innocence has been proven.
This confirms the false rape society suspicion, that people can easily be locked up for rape accusations, and that due process is violated especially in rape cases.
There have been 268 post-conviction DNA exonerations in United States history. These stories are becoming more familiar as more innocent people gain their freedom through postconviction testing. They are not proof, however, that our system is righting itself. # Seventeen people had been sentenced to death before DNA proved their innocence and led to their release.
Seventeen people had been sentenced to death before DNA proved their innocence and led to their release.
The average sentence served by DNA exonerees has been 13 years.
About 70 percent of those exonerated by DNA testing are members of minority groups.
In almost 40 percent of DNA exoneration cases, the actual perpetrator has been identified by DNA testing.
Exonerations have been won in 34 states and Washington, D.C.
The innocence Project is a national litigation and public policy organization dedicated to exonerating wrongfully convicted individuals trough DNA testing and reforming the criminal justice system to prevent future injustice. innocenceproject.org/
1) “I have nothing to say, officer”. 2) I don’t consent to searches”.
are the most important sentences to deal with police. Listen to a law school professor, a policeman, a human rights organisation. They all say the same
Police: a dangerous threat to be avoided? Why can’t we cooperate with police?
You always have the right to refuse police searches (“Officer, I don’t consent to any searches”) and refuse to answer questions without a lawyer present. (“I have nothing to say. I want to see a lawyer.”) […]
No Warrant, No Search!
The Supreme Court has ruled that the home is entitled to maximum search protection. Even if they have probable cause to believe something illegal is going on inside your home, the 4th Amendment requires police to get a signed search warrant from a judge to legally enter and search. flexyourrights.org/faq
This advice makes us cringe: as honest, law abiding citizens, we want to cooperate with law enforcement, so they can track down violent dangerous criminals and terrorists. But collaboration with police endangers our own safety and gets us into jail?
A law abiding honest citizen has to avoid talking to police? Must refrain from helping police work? The good citizen has to make it harder for police to find the real criminals by refusing to cooperate! Why can’t an honest citizen collaborate with police, so they can find criminals and terrorists?
What is wrong here? In the “Don’t talk to Cops #1” video, a law school professor explains, that even a hard core criminal lawyer could get himself trouble, if he talked to police. There are so many laws. You might be found a felon for possessing a lobster that was packed in violation of Native Indian reservation law, or Honduran Law.
Never talk to a tax official. It is impossible, not to be in violation of one of the millions of articles of tax law. in “Don’t talk to Cops #2”, a policeman explains: if he follows a car, he is certain that pretty soon he can nail the driver for some traffic violation. If the honest normal citizen cannot collaborate with police, cannot help police to make their work easier, something is wrong. Or am I the only one thinking this way?
Overcriminalization: criminalizing trivial or harmless behavior.
The new term “overcriminalization” describes the last few decades’ legislative orgy of criminalizing trivial or harmless behavior. Under “zero tolerance” the legal system has shifted ever closer to a vast police state. From 2000 to 2007 Congress added 452 new federal crimes to the 4,450 already in effect and the roughly 300,000 regulations that can be enforced criminally. “Get tough” punishments and innovative new crimes have brought career-making headlines to politicians, who encountered little resistance.
Traditionally civil offenses now resemble criminal ones in their punishment. For example, it is commonplace for judges to imprison “deadbeat dads” who cannot pay child support for civil contempt of court. Not even children are exempt. Petty offenses such as “sexting” between teens are felonies and can be severely punished; in grade schools police are sometimes called to control children who throw temper tantrums. Everyday life has been criminalized.
on June 28, 2007, Breitbart.com reported research by Northwestern Professor Bruce Spencer […] Spencer discovered that innocent defendants had a 25% chance of being wrongfully convicted by juries and 37% chance of being wrongfully convicted by a judge. In contrast, Spencer found only a 10% chance a jury would acquit a guilty person and a 13% chance a judge would acquit a guilty person. […] According to Northwestern University law professor Jack Heinz, the concentration of errors in wrongful convictions result from "the strong presumption of guilt when someone is arrested and brought to trial."
[…] criminologist Richard Moran reported his research findings in the New York Times on August 2, 2007: ‘My recently completed study of the 124 exonerations of death row inmates in America from 1973 to 2007 indicated that about 80%, or about two thirds, of their so-called wrongful convictions resulted not from good-faith mistakes or errors, but from intentional, willful, malicious prosecutions by criminal justice personnel.’
We have too many victimless crimes, harsh punishment for petty crimes, and too many laws. Every single citizen commits (harmless) crimes and felonies with regularity and is in danger of arrest and conviction. And over 99% of these “crimes” remain unpunished, with the occasional unlucky guy who gets convicted.
Potential crimes include: copyright infringement, underage sex among minors (hey, maybe you had sex with a minor when you were 15 and there is no statute of limitation), potential vengeful charges of rape and sex abuse, underage drinking, drug consumption, indadvertent possession of child porn (most men probably have some picture on their hard drive that potentially could be of a 17 year old nude).
certain practical steps could greatly alleviate the suffering of the law’s innocent victims. They include:
eliminating the ability of civil judges to imprison debtors for contempt of court;
reestablishing the need to prove “criminal intent” for criminal charges;
ceasing to prosecute victimless crimes, like drug use and sex between consenting adults;
eliminating prosecutorial immunity for corrupt or excessive prosecution;
enforcing constitutional protections such as “the presumption of innocence”; and
making all courts, including family courts, transparent.
Overcriminalization threatens everyone. It does not matter how peaceful or law-abiding you mean to be. Today you are a criminal. Tomorrow you may be a prisoner. Source: The Crime of Living
How Long Can You Go Without Infringing On Copyright: Nowadays we infringe copyrights numerous times throughout the day without even thinking about it. Watching an unauthorized SNL clip on YouTube. Playing the radio in the background at work where customers can hear. Loaning a copy of your Finding Nemo DVD to play at your kids’ daycare. Downloading clip art to use in a personal scrapbook. Scanning your own wedding photos. Forwarding a funny photograph to a friend. Loaning a co-worker some software.
As child abuse experts point out, about 50 children are reported kidnapped and raped or murdered by strangers annually, compared to more than 3,000 children murdered by parents and other family members in non-sexual cases.
Most sex offenders, says one therapist who works with sex offenders in a state prison system, are “Gentle grandfathers who made one mistake in judgment years ago and fondled their grandchild.
At issue her is:
Legal punishment for sexual “crimes” against minors is a modern witch hunt.
Totally out of proportion to damage caused by it.
Purposeful confounding of criminal violent sexual crime against minors nearly or totally harmless fondling or consensual sexual acts
any reasonable open-minded unbiased discussion or scientific analysis of the issue regarding underage sexuality is totally shunned, repressed, ignored, prohibited.