Let's Get Honest! Blog

Absolutely Uncommon Analysis of Family –and "Conciliation" — Courts' Operations, Practices, and History

Table of Contents (Posts Only, most Recent First)

with one comment

|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|__|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_

The Table of Contents, titles and links, is a visual panorama of the blog.  If this subject matter grips your gut-instinct, catches your attention — first, look at some of the evidence to the point you start to see where it comes from.  Take some time, rub your eyes, look again.   Do a few independent searches yourself, until the process of searching, I hope, awakens some curiosity, resulting in more of the same!  

Then please start talking with others (or, if you want, with me) about those topics; if you want to talk back, every post has a comments field, and there are even a few feedback forms [Here’s a Feedback Form (and a LONG rant about DV agencies)].  If you quote me, link to that post, and cite to this blog, like I do to others’ work!

The Table of Contents is a work in progress, chronological backwards in time, while as I can, the blog is moving forward.

And the introduction getting a little longer. Please utilize scroll bar if this annoys you, or read if it does not!  Shutting up is not my long suit.

 Check back periodically, for a larger listing, or more links to individual posts, as I can.   Until (which project is still an IF) the table of contents is complete, for any post listed below that doesn’t yet have its hyperlink, or for unlissted posts, the date can be used under blog’s “Archives” function (sidebar).  The blog goes back to 2009, but so far this Table of Contents does not.  In fact, some of the material is so rarely even covered, you also might get to a certain post lacking the direct link, by a simple searching Google for its title.

Another issue — I’m UNsticking what are marked sticky posts (so more current ones stay closer to top of blog), but leaving the designation in the left column.   The left column marks ones formerly sticky or that I otherwise consider keynote, or critical information to understanding the system.

This information requires a different kind of attention span and for most people (particularly people who may come to this blog because of a custody horrors case) the ability (which is basically just a decision) to look at this very large, very complex problem with nonstandard vocabulary.  I assert that this vocabulary MUST include the economic/corporate-government factor (the “Operations”) in terms that convey meaning to those who use them.

  Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Let's Get Honest

March 2, 2014 at 9:02 pm

New Here? A Roadmap with some Chronology, Links, Issues (Sidebar-Plus)

with one comment

This post (about 6,500 words) contains essentially two or three of the sidebar text-boxes (“widgets”) which, each of them, was designed intentionally to start narrating a theme, or section of the subject matter, covering a lot of ground (with links), for the total strangers (and/or followers) who are about to be deluged with details of discovered distressing data about how far downhill (or, downstream) ARE we in the complete elimination of representative government, by jurisdiction — to be replaced by the corporate administrative model, centralized, and with subscribing membership being the population of the United States of America, segmented by caste in relationship to how they do business, and with whom, across the line.

Of which the family courts are only a part — but definitely a critical part (inter)nationally.  WHY? because it affects so many – -and organizes/re-structures all primary relationships of parents, children, with each other and with the local community.  

I realize my writing style is to “overload” information, with links, and then expect people to catch on. Some are, but not without actually reading some of the posts, and clicking on those links, using a few of the many lookup tools also posted.  

Too Busy?  Not motivated to look long enough? You want a short, fast, FAQs page which you can read, and then not have to validate, or invalidate, consider?

Are you still in the habit of believing that, the more people “like” or re-blog something, the more relevant and truthful it is? (Haven’t learned about who funds public media campaigns yet or WHY?).  If so, I’m so sorry — where did you get this belief that the better the PR (advertising, media campaigns), the more truthful it is?  Are we not yet aware that our own government has invested federal welfare funds diverted from, welfare,  into PR campaigns to its own population?  

And that under the premise that what’s best for us all [[whether to go to war, to go to work, or to stay married when it's not in ours, or what is the hierarchical relationship to be maintained between men and women, nationwide]] is to be unified around mass-indoctrination programs we ourselves fund simply by the act of going to work, or related acts, of buying things that are taxed?    

This may help.

I know the FAQs, could list from 5 to 10 of them in any situation (often do in public conversations) and occasionally write them up. However, that’s not the purpose of this blog. The purpose is that you see enough to understand how vital it is to “Look and See.” That what you see sooner or later grabs your attention; that your attention span increases on these matters; that your capacity to absorb truth (even if it’s distressing or negative, if it’s still truth, that alone is healing).

It’s the Looking and Seeing that may produce change — not my authoritative, jazzy (which it isn’t), socially acceptable and top of the popularity sites (which it also isn’t), and visually creative (ditto) trademarked (nope) material which will draw thousands of shallow, temporary and uncommitted “likes” and no personal change.

I am looking for others who see what I have seen –and asking, what they plan to do about it? If the answer is, “nothing” and that answer is universal and consistent enough, then MY response will (and should) be, after a specific time, “fine! Then go save yourself, protect your assets, kids, future, status quo — and I will drop this, and with a clean conscience, adopt a selfish, non-reporting lifestyle with the one goal — profits to counter dependency on this tax system, and probably in a country NOT known for having the world’s largest per-capita prison population.

However, presently (2014) people from a few different states have responded, I am in touch with them, and we are in touch with members of Congress, or candidates for mid-term elections. So I’m still blogging and messing with this blog to categorize, make it a little more accessible, and adding as I find insight and material, or seeking better ways to communicate it.

Sometimes material has to just stay out there (on the web) long enough to make SOME difference, like enzymes, catalyzing digestion of (here, information/ideas) consumed, and changing the chemical composition of understanding.

For more “opinion” on moving this Widget to Post status (without changing it — it’s nearly identical to the one on the far bottom of the right sidebar) — see below it. The idea is, read, scan for subject matter, click on links at will.  This is more like a “course overview” with samples, than a pretense at the whole.

Thanks.

[First post-publication/addition:]

OK, for people who need more LISTS, here’s a list 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10, 11 — Top Ten Plus OneSticky Posts & Abstracts.

Just realize my mind doesn’t work in perhaps traditional ways, and is thinking instead of layering depth, seeking understanding.  Some of the quest to really understand comes from “once burnt, twice shy”*

Anyhow:   On November 24, 2013, I managed to do some “Top Ten Posts, Plus One, of nearly 600 published, Covering Basic Issues (+ abstracts)” posts.  That’s a list of them (at the time) and some short abstracts underneath.  I stay on a learning curve, so consider these a snapshot in time, though. Inside the next box, an intro and a reminder that in this blog, each new posts comes underneath however many ones are “stuck” to the top of the blog.  So get used to that scroll bar, cursor-down, whatever works on your internet device.  My posts aren’t really set for reading on a mobile phone, but I know some people who do anyway.

[I'm "unsticking" ten posts formerly held near the top of blog, a.k.a., redecorating..for functionality  ..and out of boredom looking at the same thing every day..This post is "sticky" and stays on top.  New posts are beneath the ones marked "This post is sticky." Also note, I often revise or expand (alas) after (at times long after) publishing. WYSIWYG..]

First, the “Plus One.”  Regarding biotech, pharmaceutical, and gene-tinkering disruptive technology corporations — don’t mistakenly think they have nothing to do with the family courts, or kids in foster care and other vulnerable populations.  SOMEbody has to fund studies, and someone has to become the subject matter of them; we are all interrelated — in our various assigned sectors.Below, I chose 10 formerly “sticky” posts to Unstick them, and put actual new posts closer to the top of the blog.

Part of this blog, I sometimes look up the corporations that fund the foundations that tell our government what to do, especially with low-income people, and those who actually have to show up in the family courts over something or other.  Or, who actually have child support orders, which also might end up hauling in a few strays into the system for the sport of watching everyone squirm and struggle for air.

(**only neither once burnt, nor twice shy, does justice to JUST HOW MUCH sense of betrayal applies when one delivers offspring for a weekly, court-ordered exchange in SOME shreds of hope the system means something, to just not see them again, essentially, for any major holiday, and in some cases, for years.   If there’d been some legitimate stated cause (and any proof of it), that’d be one manner.  But, to date, no proof in this system = “So what! Who cares?”

I didn’t, however, understand WHY it (the system) “doesn’t care” until I understood some of the history, fauna & flora (i.e., ,the push to include psychologists in the court process) and the intentional hybrid jurisdiction grab, i.e., into “therapeutic jurisprudence” as a desired judiciary value, at least as funded by one of the world’s largest pharmaceutical company’s philanthropic foundation (i.e., from Johnson & Johnson, to Robert Wood Johnson Foundation sponsoring the Unified Family Courts [subject matter jurisdiction grabbing] model.  See recent posts.)

Personally speaking, the shock factor is continuous and takes work to overcome, without just becoming desensitized.  I will also testify — at a certain point, it just never gets better.  That has been my experience, whether trying, or not trying, to make a significant difference in the individual situation.

But at least, once I got the “rich people fund problem-solving for problems their grandchildren have, possibly in part because they hadn’t had to work a day in their lives (thanks to the family trust), or in part because they abuse, falsely imprison, abandon, and betray their own as well, resulting in issues like: substance abuse, diabetes, etc.” it made a lot more sense why we, too, should ALL have to deal with their various ideologies, idiosyncrasies, and shared visions of global utopia, and sacrifice our legal and civil rights to that vision.  [See posts on the topic, for that to make a little more sense] Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Let's Get Honest

February 24, 2014 at 3:05 pm

Get Real(itybloger)! — Call In, Read the Links on CAFRs, Review Regularly.

with 2 comments

post revised/expanded (see especially bottom of post) 1-29/30th, 2014;

C.A.F.R. =  Comprehensive Annual Financial Report.

Governments issue CAFRs ANNUALLY.  How many governments ARE there, besides states and counties, and federal?  LOTS.

Like I said recently in a post….there is even a US Census of Governments defining their count (which cited a 75% response rate, so adjust upward for error? add the ones legislated into existence since the census was taken. . . . ).

I also found some HHS grant to a health district (to my recall) in Nebraska which having been replaced with a more regional one, was thereby no longer valid.  Tell me what else was new in how can the federal government dump wealth into fiscal black holes and then go back to the taxpayers, “Please (well, “or else….”), more taxes or fewer services WHICH do you prefer?”???  [hit me with a comment if you want the reference, it's several weeks back...]

Who is going to change the conversation without a solid reading on the what’s in our government’s back pockets, and being currency, accounting, history AND government illiterates?  Because, this is about changing the conversation, not following the scripts.   


When you see talk of “budgets” in the media, or coming from a politician’s mouth, generally you will not find a reference to the collective holdings of that govenment entity (federal, state, or other) or other nongovernmental funds these mentioned alongside them.  This is a deliberate standardized form of government accounting which has (like any form of accounting) a deliberate purpose, namely, to justify ongoing UNjustifiable taxation for “budget-balancing.”


This topic is something individuals have to decide to bring up and discuss among themselves — or just go deaf, dumb (literally), and logically disabled.  The topic cannot have been handed on much more of a silver platter than some of these bloggers have already done and is a statement about what time of day it is in the USA.

[Revisions 1-29-2014:]If you want to see what happens when someone intent on talking about it engages with someone intent on discrediting or minimizing the concept (that any that the CAFR issue represents and strategical (conspiracy) to defraud), check out Walter Burien (former)  simply taking on Ellen H. Brown (the latter) in 2010′s attempt to change the conversation.  One of the two is an attorney, want to toss a coin on which one was more accurate and honest?I did a follow-up on the same attorney’s proposed solutions — and you should see what THAT revealed (and will, if I get it past draft form) when it comes to deceitful accounting practices by progressive nonprofits…Ms. Brown wants Public Banks (and the following year chose a very “strange” nonprofit with six PhD’s and several MA’s (or so it says) as their fiscal agent (Inquiring Systems Inc.) which has made it clear what it thinks of Americans in many ways, most obviously by failing to file properly as a nonprofit until caught and told to (ca. 2009/2010 — they incorporated in 1978) and with a kazillion earth-green-progressive-oh-so-altruistic projects under the one head, most of which have the same individuals on the board, or advisory board.

Logo


Organization Name Registration Number Record Type Registration Status City State Registrn Type Record Type
INQUIRING SYSTEMS, INC. 034547 Charity Delinquent SONOMA CA Charity Registration Charity
1

EIN# 94-2524840.  (see California Charitable Trusts Registry for filing history (such as it is).  Samples: InquiringSystemsInc CharitableReturnsDetails shows 9years of Nonfiling (per Calif Law)!! ~ InquiringSystems 2nd California Charities (OAG)Delinquency Ltr 2010 March 481595 ~ ISI,EIN#94-2524840, TaxReturn2011(YE 6-30-12) showin $980K gross receipts, 1545 volunteers, and presumably Public Banking Institute along with all the others to improve the human condition by serving as a fiscal agent  (after being confronted and forced to cough up some charitable registrations and tax returns to the State of California for many years (PBI (Public Banking Institute) was added as one of the many projects,

ORGANIZATION NAME STATE YEAR FORM PAGES TOTAL ASSETS EIN
Inquiring Systems CA 2012 990 28 $304,285 #94-2524840
Inquiring Systems Inc. CA 2011 990 30 $537,191 #94-2524840
Inquiring Systems Inc. CA 2010 990ER 1 $147,295 #94-2524840

This led (simply through a normal follow-up process) to seeing the UN/NWO connection, however I was a few years behind on that one also (follow-up by WB date 9/2010… explains what the concept of “public state-run banks” means in plain English (contains the phrase “you can kiss the United States goodbye” and “New World Order signed, sealed, and delivered.”)  Quote added to bottom of this page, stay tuned…

[about one month later -- interesting Advisory Board with a London School of Economics connection, I'd just like us to understand what rooms this conversation is taking place in, and in that light WHY it really does matter, to get basic identities on the conversationalists, not meaning -- their personal style, but their choice of colleagues associates, choice of corporate identities, which collectively is going to affect worldview (or reveal it). This PBI matter IS in the "New World Order" view, and for one, I am not a subscriber to the philosophy that we'd all be better off on larger, more streamlined leadership with a Council of Elders, as if this was till somehow a democratic, village all-for-one and one-for-all planet with easily identified good guys and bad guys (for example, all environmentalists are good, and -here -- large corporations and governments can be tamed by some minor adjustments to business as usual -- change the accounting structure SLIGHTLY (don't eliminate taxes, just, as Burien pointed out, cut out the middlemen and keep the stash of cash -- only through networked State banks, not the Feds...). At what point do we, the people, get to (or get smart and organized enough) to find honest leadership, still people capable of handling investments, infrastructure, and complex financial operations -- but honest enough to understand that even IF and WHEN laws have sequestered the profit-making enterprises of government into sections they don't have to report under "BUDGET" -- these laws were passed once, and can be changed later? To do this without de-toxing from the fragmented and censored view of reality we are literally DRENCHED with worldwide is (IMHO) probably impossible. Then again, producing miracles is a matter of faith, which is a matter of heart. Really, what I'm talking about is a change of heart informing the cognitive functions (the intellect) of millions of PEOPLE. Before freedom from slavery, one has to stop thinking like a slave, which includes taking responsibility for one's own thought-life, and focus of attention. After the basic institutional escape, there's still protecting boundaries, and of course recovery (re-structuring a non-slavery response; knowing what freedom cost, and those who didn't make it, one does NOT permit regular incursions on it, or tolerate systematic and chronic lies from people either running institutions -- or seeking to run new ones).

[Understanding the truths the CAFRs tell us -- is primary. Enjoy the rest of the post; thanks!]
Read the rest of this entry »

CDRC and Friends: Ever Wonder How All that Mediation, Alternate Dispute Resolution, etc. got passed?

with one comment

This is a combination of what I took OUT of “Flipping Cause and Effect” post — when the website I was reviewing brought up “Jay Folberg” as Dean of USF Law.

I knew he had more connections than this, and looked up my previous posts on the CDRC (California Dispute Resolution Council), which became the “Unified Voice” of all these dispute resolution professionals — unbelievable how they stepped into line once it (apparently) became clear someone was going to help them set up a nice pyramid? scheme using public funds, as satellites to the county courthouses, etc.

This has links to two earlier September, 2012 posts (herein), some more AFCC newsletters (1993, 1997– put also as links on the side) and I learned that William and Flora Hewett Foundation have been very nicely supportive of AFCC and CDRC.

I also learned that these guys figured someone was going to sue them, because they planned ahead for liability insurance for the profession. All in all, it’s a very interesting set of information — and possibly demonstrates how lobbying happens, in the court systems.

It shows the use of the nonprofits (and foundations, whether private, or large ones funding nonprofits), coalitions of nonprofits conferencing together — all that — it shows how they get their business accomplished.

Public service may be a collateral effect, but I doubt is the primary purpose. These are people who have invented and protected their own profession, with advance planning. AFCC professionals ARE involved, and you have to look at some tax returns. Tell a friend…. Thanks!
Read the rest of this entry »

A Stunning Validation by Jeffrey Moussaieff Masson: The Assault on Truth, The Origins of Psychoanalysis

with 12 comments

A key issue in the courts includes sexual assault and violence towards women and children. This has also been a key issue with psychoanalysis. Cummings is a psychoanalyst, or has been one.

The key, or leading edge, feature OF these courts includes therapeutic jurisprudence, attempting to resolve conflict through addition of behavioral health professionals, the field Dr. Cummings has dedicated much of his life to preserving the business and economic well-being of, to the point that a Wall Street Journal article reported, not too many years ago, that — doctors and hardcore professionals aside, among the top highest paying professional jobs, including the benefits and actual hours worked to earn the pay, were: Judges, and (with a doctorate) psychologists.

He is also well-informed in his field, has been a psychoanalyst, and very likely knew of this other psychoanalyst’s, Mr. Masson’s, 1980s allegations of Anna Freud’s censorship of her father’s letters, which cast an entirely different light on what “The Etiology of Hysteria” is.

Time to read this statement of “The Assault on Truth, The Origins of Psychoanalysis .

(I notice the Cummings Foundation site also got a facelift since my last visits).

I feel it’s only fair to warn people which path they are going down. If they want to ignore the warnings, then it’s not my problem, other than when it’s draining attention and energies from more critical analyses — which this movement IS, and is probably intended to do.

As soon as I saw the January 2012 advertisement (at the SF Center for Psychoanalysis) of an upcoming March 2012 “FREE TRAINING IN ARIZONA” I blogged it, Our Broken Family Court” isn’t. It ain’t “Ours” and it ain’t “Broken.” That phrase is a “tell.” I’ll tell you why…. [excerpt:]

Donner authored an excellent article {bold added} by the same title in Psychoanalytic Psychology. Contact him (HERE) to request a copy of “Tearing Children Apart: The Contribution of Narcissism, Envy and Perverse Modes of Thought to Child Custody Wars.” [see FN3 LGH, below]
Our broken family court system: Free training in Arizona

Another free training geared toward child custody evaluators is coming up March 16-17 [2012] in Phoenix, Arizona. Co-sponsored by the National Alliance of Professional Psychology Providers and the Nicholas and Dorothy Cummings Foundation, it features a cast of well-known experts, including:

More information and online registration is available HERE.

How much of this “Broken Courts” buzzwords (spoken by the people who have the answers, which naturally involves buying certain products, trainings, and consultations, by the same, on how to fix it) — is enough?

When is anyone (else) going to actually, literally, develop the habit of running background checks on charming, or wealthy strangers who approach them (or into whose strong, authoritative, and competent, OPEN ARMS someone is tempted to dash for sympathy and protection — or for money). Wasn’t that, ladies, part of what got you into an abusive relationship to start with? Handsome strangers, charming, eloquent and INTERESTED IN YOU?

I do this consistently. It’s been a great source of learning, enriched my understanding of this vital field, and moreover, helped me screen out the liars and dissemblers (those who don’t quite lie, literally, but systematically “forget” to reveal who they really are, and what is the agenda, which you get to find out later — after the situation is further compromised, you have less time, money and energy left, and in some cases, in which it’s just plain too late to extricate onesself – - or one’s kids). I will explain this further, separately.


FYI, I found the material on Freud’s Archives/Jeffrey M. M. looking up the background of the Cummings Foundation and Nicholas Cummings.

One thing about investigating, looking things up: be prepared to have world view turned upside down (or the sense that something IS upside down, or backwards as presented in public confirmed). In this case, regardless of who this man was personally, at the point of insisting to publish about the Freud coverup, he was acting in the public interest.

Post-Published Note. First published Feb. 2013. In Dec. 2013, realizing in ongoing conversations and further readings how central this topic is to the family and conciliation court systems, including possibly why we even have them to start with, I re-arranged, moving a major section to the top of the post. Therefore further introductory sections may seem out of sequence. I think EVERYONE concerned with the courts, even though I know I primarily focus on the economic factors, should read this material. Jeffrey Moussaieff Masson was highly qualified, had access to the Freud archives, documents how censorship of his work after 1897 continued even up to the 1950s, when the letters were compiled (including by his daughter Anna), constituting “The Origins of Psychoanalysis.”


Quote First, Commentary below. Especially read if you’re considering signing up for psychoanalysis!

So who is that guy? Briefly,

Jeffrey Moussaieff Masson is a writer who lives with his family in New Zealand. He has a 36-year-old daughter, Simone, who is getting her masters in nursing at UCSF. His wife Leila is a pediatrician and they have two sons: Ilan and Manu. They live on a beach in Auckland with three cats and Benjy the Failed Guide Dog (the hero of Jeff’s latest book).
Jeff has a Ph.D. in Sanskrit from Harvard University. He was Professor of Sanskrit at the University of Toronto. While at the university he trained as a Freudian analyst (from 1971-1979) graduating as a full member of the International Psycho-Analytical Association. In 1980 he became Project Director of the Sigmund Freud Archives.
Given access to Freud’s papers in London and the Library of Congress, his research led him to believe that Freud made a mistake when he stopped believing that the source of much human misery lay in sexual abuse. Masson’s view was so controversial within traditional analytic circles that he was fired from the archives and had his membership in the international society taken away. Janet Malcolm has written a book about this episode (In the Freud Archives – the subject of a libel suit by Masson) and Jeff has published a series of books critical of Freud, psychoanalysis, psychiatry and therapy.


Skeptical that humans could be understood (at least by psychologists) Masson turned to animals. In 1995 he published When Elephants Weep, an international best seller, followed by the equally popular Dogs Never Lie About Love.


So, here is the gist of it:
Read the rest of this entry »

Exposing and Prosecuting Judicial Corruption through Common Law Discovery (1997 Interview)

with 7 comments

This Post is Sticky (one of about 5 sticky posts) and stays near the top. Others are below. Also, I just moved the “Supervised Visitation” section to a separate post (and of course expanded that one) on 6/6/2013.

File this Article under “What a Difference One Person can Make, if that person:

Has Guts, Will Obtain Evidence, Look at Evidence, Come to Logical Conclusion regarding Evidence Obtained AND Publicize It!

Read the rest of this entry »

A Different Kind of Attention develops Sound Judgment

with 3 comments

To my 259+ “Followers” who just received an email notification of this trust (and other viewers)…. You were just mailed a post in DRAFT status, when yours truly hit “Publish” instead of “Save Draft” while editing it.  Right now, my version of wordpress, or my input device, simply will not let me put a published post back into draft or pending status.  When I attempt, the system simply refreshes all windows.

{{As of Mon 3/24/2014, I have continued adding to and editing this post; it has now doubled and is about 16,000+ words long.  Please scroll through the material if you only plan to read part — I tend to add material to the middle and introductions, when revising; meaning some of the original topic (after first stating it) is moved down towards the end. Or, I will split it off.  

To put it bluntly — I’m an investigative blogger (and DV survivor, mother, etc.).  I don’t publish in professional journals, and my former profession was not based around getting federal grants to write up others problems in a scholarly manner.  Rather, I provided genuine services, real-time (and involving considerable focus, preparation, and practice) to a local community, based on demand for those service, NOT forced consumption by the local courts and the federal child support or welfare system — making it a win-win situation (if not necessarily producing wealth, it was a healthy lifestyle for sure. So — obviously this is not “AP” (or any other) editing style  When I get to it, I’ll split this post, maybe.  In the meanwhile, everything I wrote goes into a storehouse ALSO called memory (awareness of  trends, systems, groups and to a degree, personnel).

Therefore, I pretty much blog it as a write it — with about 2/3 more posts in draft, and consistent communications (networking) by phone and email as well.}.

However, even incomplete and in draft, this post on this material is still timely, and relevant. It proves who (by group name, including Executive Director), while valiant in reporting troubling matters,  was still systematically and uniformly covering up, or had abandoned from all significant public discussion the role of the federal grants (access/visitation  in particular) in influencing INDIVIDUAL  custody cases where child abuse had already been identified.

The information surrounding the creation of the family and conciliation courts, plus its relationship to “welfare reform” is significant enough it puts an entirely different light on the whole subject matter. There are  MANY corollaries (logical conclusions) from the information about the Who, What, When, Where, How and even Why  that make sense of the current situations in the court and enable people paying attention to  even see, document , changes continuing to happen along the same lines.

There is literally  NO EXCUSE for this degree of  OMISSION from DISCUSSION of THIS MUCH relevant information.  

This post also again PROVES that the organization in question, through  its at least 2004 Executive Director, and as I have asserted often enough in person (email, phone) and I believe on this blog, has had access all along — and chose to siderail that information, if not eliminate it from their email alerts, co-sponsored conference topics, summaries of the situation and assessments — as do the professionals and other organizations they tend to support, promote and help publicize.

With the information from Liz Richards nafcj.net alone, a logical  conclusion  would QUICKLY lead [as it did me] sensible people to understand (better) the events leading up to and following from the 1996 PRWORA welfare reform and, by NAMING them, which significant organizations and individuals were restructuring not just the courts, but the entire US Government (economically, through radical changes to the Social Security Act). Please note, from NAFCJ.net website, front page: “Fifth Step – Change your Reaction Mode” which is still good advice!

Fifth Step: Change your reaction mode: Learn how stop being fooled and manipulated by dishonest people who are supposed to be helping you ! Learn about unique responses to this problem.

I’m not sure I agree at this point with the recommended responses, which could and have produced retaliatory action (extreme) upon individuals.  I DO, however, agree with researching and finding out WTF is going on — in those areas!

Also see, June 2010 Testimony Liz submitted to the House Ways and Means Committee prior to another fatherhood bill authorization (I alerted the group emails I was on at the time to this, not having regular internet access (or a laptop, or a car, or income) at that particular season)….  Read “An Expensive Remedy in Search of a Legitimate Problem”  And, in June 27, 2012, Anne Stevenson, as an individual (not representing a nonprofit or organization) gave another fantastic testimony before the House Ways and Means Committee, <=<=<=VERY well documented!  Anne since then has begun to take the AFCC apart at the seems, and properly so, as individuals did in prior years.

There is a full generation (at least) of ignorance to dispel in this arena – meanwhile (since), I’ve come to learn (too much) more about who’s been backing this particular nonprofit and have come to my own conclusions about WHY marriage/fatherhood programming was set up to start with (and it’s not, FYI, just for custody matters.  It’s about the system change!! And not the good kind).

[So, Liz R. wrote in 6/2010]

My research and findings have been included in a DoJ study on the negative impact of the fathers rights movement on domestic violence victims. My group is also listed on the Department of Justice, National Criminal Justice Resource Center (NCJRS) web site as an official resource.

(http://www.ncjrs.gov/app/topics/Topic.aspx?topicid=36 )* All the evidence I’ve observed indicates the Responsible Fatherhood programs are merely a cover for recruiting bad dads with offers of child support abatements into high-conflict litigation, giving sole custody of the children to the father and getting the mother out of picture and forcing her to pay excessive child support obligations to him

**scroll down to the bottom..National Criminal Justice Reference Service

Right on top of that link is a link to AFCC.net.

So, “Congratulations” for the Protective Parents Movements that don’t want to deal with EITHER of those websites, and follow the evidence to some logical conclusions…  In 2013, the Battered Mothers’ Custody Conference (BMCC) invited a participant that AFCC calls one of its “partners” — and AFCC is promoting PAS that BMCC protests.  This is beginning (once you look at the details) to look more and more like a farce (carefully scripted puppet show) in the macro view.  But that will not become clear without sorting through organizations, corporations, and their relationship to each other (and federal government).  

At this point I am no longer dealing with Liz by phone or email; one reason had to do with compromise of confidentiality on email lists; another was, basic phone courtesy, (i.e., listening to at least one complete sentence before shouting it down), and a few other reasons.  I also do not know what is the current information loop of people who contact NAFCJ.net with the justice system; and I do not buy the many excuses for not blogging this material so that other mothers could see it closer to the beginning of their court cases, and be warned. But essentially, at least she put out valid, LIVE information that others had sought to coverup, AFTER it had been exposed, and published!



By the time people have gone through the “protective parents” material and figured out something (possibly including their children) was MISSING from the information provided them about PAS (like, which groups were pushing it, by name), and run across NAFCJ.net (or now, other material we have been blogging consistently), the cases are going, going, GONE!

It truly takes a network of “don’t and won’t talk about it” conferences, professionals, and social media experts to keep this many women (and men) this clueless for this long. I think reform has to come from OUTSIDE the legal and psychological professions — and one standard I have is, anyone or group who has participated in censorship or derailing of conversations for personal or professional profit, is a “no-deal” proposition.  

Judging by conference materials of collaborating groups since (i.e., the Battered Mothers’ Custody Conference/”BMCC” which met from 2003-2012 in New York, which met May 2013 in Washington, D.C. and who for Year 2014 is (I gather) doing a “mini-BMCC” again in D.C., while Mo Hannah (one of its two co-founders) takes a year off, there is still NO INTENTION on the part of  this collaboration of advocacy groups  to concede any  past errors, to relinquish any undeserved credibility as having the best interests of:

Battered Mothers, Protective Parents, Abused Children, or Courageous Kids and Incest Survivors at the center of their concerns, rather than retaining “NextGen Expert Status” and getting a personal piece of the federal grants pie.

Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Let's Get Honest

March 23, 2014 at 9:26 am

Suppose I’m Right, here. . . What Would You Do when the Lights go On?

leave a comment »

 [post is 20,000 words [3/6/2014], will probably be split in half later.  Has many examples.]

To Whom It Concerns — Suppose I’m Right?

. . . . In general, and in what I’m about to prove, right now? . . . . Suppose that when I report what I see (and hear), I am seeing and hearing quite well, based on my report versus independently observed reality?

Even though it’s quite the minority opinion, suppose it’s far closer to the mark than others?

In fact years after some of this started hitting the Internet, people reporting consistently, diligently (and accurately) on these matters are so few and far between that we get confused with each other by outsiders, the language is just that different.   “….all you people look alike….”

To Whom It Concerns among the:

  • 254 or so followers,
  • Others who receive each new tweeted post because they follow Lets Get Honest on Twitter, or
  • Among those I report on, and who are monitoring to see how much, how close to the mainline truths are “out” so far, (bloggers do get to know this in back-office functions; I’ve even posted a few samples on an About This Blog page, i.e., who was watching this blog when), and are curious if and when their gigs are up;
  • Or those who click after reading some comment I submit elsewhere along the lines of “get real!” or “What about this?” that indicate some of us simply don’t talk like the others, when addressing:

Family (and Conciliation) Court Matters

(and an Uncommon Analysis of the Operations, Practices and History, thereof) 

Suppose I’m right?

Some holes are fathomless, they seem to have no end.  But, suppose, we have already hit the bedrock, here in this blog[*], of: Fundamental, Urgent and Relevant Truths — what would you do when the lights go on?

[* including the many links to other sources, but what's here, is my assembly of that information, my general roadmap, and "Analysis."  Incidentally, it's also copyrighted to me, Let's Get Honest (i.e., this blogger), except where quoting other copyrighted material, and subject to wordpress Terms of Use]

Or is the dark more comfortable, because the lights tend to show things that need to be cleaned up,

. . . . .for example nationally respected [by whom?] experts and consultants whose Don’t Ask Don’t Tell policies on major aspects of the truth is resulting in too many dumbed-down, distracted and misled mothers,

. . . .who (have been) willing to mortgage the greater truth [entire categories of it] for a stripped-down version, minus accurate vocabulary and plus folklore on “how and why judges (etc.) make decisions,” but at least with the press coverage of the personal drama, and a nice supportive group of on-line friends who also don’t do lookups, use TAGGS, or apparently question their leadership much, but are quick to fight back in comments fields others who do. 

Over time, while new generations of roadkill, children STILL being murdered in or around supervised visitation (or court-ordered) exchanges, sometimes and/or with the father, or mother, other times with bystanders — and lives are disrupted (and bankrupted) — the conversation from this assembly of experts has barely changed, except “hitch your story to this wagon, and hope for results through self-selecting intermediaries…” and they have now picked up, year by year, more connections with the “court-connected corps” crowd, who are hardly about to get confronted on matters such as relate to misdirected, diverted, and otherwise inappropriate federal grants to the states [i.e., such as some of us DID report on] to help increase the misery level in the average contested custody case. 

Other than what I’ve been saying (show and telling) all along, the next two to three posts, I have recently seen and come to a (firm) understanding of some rock-solid and hard-to-accept truths.  BUT, I believe the assessment is good.  First, let me outline them (and it is in out-line form).

Then, below, I’ve referenced some math (proof) terms, i.e., Proof is a Process with Elements.  Propaganda, on the other hand, is a swirl of insinuations.   My “SUPPOSE” are in “SUPPOSITION” format, an IF/THEN process.  I feel we have to first establish that it matters!  And that truth (or at least proofs of it) have a form.  So the words:

LEMMA, THEOREM, PROPOSITION, and COROLLARY — we’re talking, how to talk some sense, instead of NONsense — have to make an appearance.  Look for this photo, below (twice):

confused student

Etymology On-line (good reference for understanding words’ origins).  It has an index; all definitions below from this:source.

lemma (n.) Look up lemma at Dictionary.com1560s, first in mathematics, from Greek lemma (plural lemmata) “something received or taken; an argument; something taken for granted,” from root of lambanein “to take” (see analemma).


So the word “lemma” apparently means “taken,” (“taken for granted,”) or in our terms, we might call it the opposite, a “given.”  (“Given that so and so is true, then  . . . . “)


analemma (n.) Look up analemma at Dictionary.com1650s, from Latin analemma “the pedestal of a sundial,” hence the sundial itself, from Greek analemma “prop, support,” from analambanein “to receive, take up, restore,” from ana- “up” (see ana-) + lambanein “to take,” from PIE root *(s)lagw- “to seize, take” (cf. Sanskrit labhaterabhate “seizes;” Old English læccan “to seize, grasp;” Greek lazomai “I take, grasp;” Old Church Slavonic leca “to catch, snare;” Lithuanian lobis “possession, riches”).

You’ve probably heard of this word — which means, “oh my, both can’t be right– I’m going to have to choose between two:”

dilemma (n.) Look up dilemma at Dictionary.com1520s, from Late Latin dilemma, from Greek dilemma “double proposition,” a technical term in rhetoric, from di- “two” + lemma“premise, anything received or taken,” from root of lambanein “to take” (see analemma). It should be used only of situations where someone is forced to choose between two alternatives, both unfavorable to him. But even logicians disagree on whether certain situations are dilemmas or mere syllogisms.


So the “Lemma” is a sort of given, the Corollary, is something attached to it — “if that’s true, so is this” — a PROPOSITION is putting them side by side to come to a conclusion about the situation, and a THEOREM is a little stronger, we got something going there as to truth…


corollary (n.) Look up corollary at Dictionary.comlate 14c., from Late Latin corollarium “a deduction, consequence,” from Latin corollarium, originally “money paid for a garland,” hence “gift, gratuity, something extra;” and in logic, “a proposition proved from another that has been proved.” From corolla“small garland,” diminutive of corona “crown” (see crown (n.).


I guess if someone hits two (truth) birds with one stone, that’s rewarding — a corollary.  If one is looking to assess the situation, and by determining whether or not ONE proposition? (or “lemma,” whichever!…) is true and then obviously there’s a corollary, it’s like a bonus point in the pursuit of truth.  the pursuit of truth, for example, is important when one is in protection, survival, rescue, or defense situations — or simply looking to understand what’s going on!!

proposition (n.) Look up proposition at Dictionary.commid-14c., “a setting forth as a topic for discussion,” from Old French proposicion “proposal, submission, (philosophical) proposition” (12c.), from Latin propositionem (nominative propositio) “a setting forth, statement, a presentation, representation; fundamental assumption,” noun of action from past participle stem of proponere (see propound). Meaning “action of proposing something to be done” is from late 14c. General sense of “matter, problem, undertaking” recorded by 1877. Related: Propositional.


theorem (n.) Look up theorem at Dictionary.com1550s, from Middle French théorème (16c.) and directly from Late Latin theorema, from Greek theorema “spectacle, sight,” in Euclid “proposition to be proved,” literally “that which is looked at,” from theorein “to look at, behold” (see theory).

Pythagorean (adj.) Look up Pythagorean at Dictionary.com1540s, from Latin Pythagoreus “of or pertaining to Pythagoras,” Greek philosopher of Samos (6c. B.C.E.), whose teachings included transmigration of the soul and vegetarianism (these are some of the commonest early allusions in English). The Pythagorean theorem is the 47th of the first book of Euclid.

So, language really counts; it matters.  To SPEAK (on-line, includes to write) means placing words into a coherent (or incoherent) pattern of statements, either at one place and time, or many places, over time.

 When someone’s, or some group’s, or group of groups’ SPEECH continues incoherent (in meaning; things don’t add up) — this could be accidental, because the speakers are distracted or somehow disabled (for example a PTSD state or outside influence may be involved).

But, over the long-run, if it’s consistently internally and externally incoherent, it’s likely intentional, and designed to manipulate, not just persuade through reason.  There could be a group motive; i.e., what’s the relationship with others outside the immediate conversations?  What is the pattern of the other relationships in the room?  When they are better known (which takes some time, and definitely some attention, some lookups), probable intentions and motives become more clear.

So that’s what we’re looking at here.

I’m not a math brainac (and don’t even do calculus), math and logic are about proof and disproof.  But if things don’t add up, they just don’t add up, so why continue yakking along the same lines, or listen to others who do?

Would it not help to have some way of screening the information, or sorting it (INbox, OUTbox), to distinguish  “doesn’t add up” from “adds up,” and to make better decisions on when “where do I put my focus and spend my time, en route to regaining contact with my kids, staying alive (or keeping them alive), with a long-term view to figuring out whether OR NOT these family and conciliation, problem-solving, holistic, unified, high-conflict docket (etc.) courts are worth saving and fixing, and/or whether a more appropriate practice for the public (nationwide) might be quarantining them, or administering a shut-down, like any hazardous waste, or hazardous construction zone — or HUD slumlord property, someone’s real estate investment en route to a political career — as unfit for human habitation?

Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Let's Get Honest

March 5, 2014 at 9:48 pm

The Stacked Deck, the Coups d’Etat, and the Fork in the Road.

leave a comment »

I am so used to summarizing situations for strangers, on the phone, for people who have decided to network, and pick up this ball (and run with it — in various states), I often end up summarizing the material — in a sidebar widget. One reason I do this — I’m tired of summarizing the material one by one, and on the phone.  If it’s not clear from the blog, then — well, too bad!

NOT the best idea.

However, this post supplements one of my sidebar [widget] long, narrow, narratives — one that reads Contributions Welcome — which they are.  I’m incorporated as a nonprofit, so they’re not deductible, nor are there many of them. Intentionally so, given what I’ve seen of nonprofit funding — and also for more flexibility; I’m not a joiner, seek to avoid group-think; I just want this material written up to discover who else may be interested in strategizing for change.

And what we need to change is the system of taxes creating for-profit and not-for profit corporations to start with, which makes it impossible to track where ALL government funds (collectively) are going.  That alone (let alone other factors) means we can’t humanly know what we have invested in through our contributions to government for those who work.  It also stacks the deck away from those who pay taxes (except upper-bracket incomes, or those with other income streams) and towards the the wealthy and influential.

So, after considering how to incorporate, I decided against a 501(c)3.  Smaller amounts will help pay for basics for me, the blogger — and as possible for some platform upgrades (I have two in mind, neither too pricey) and after material is in good enough shape, some PRWire press releases, etc.  I’m not trying to turn this into a livelihood — just preserve the record, and to silence some of the groups which have censored this information and, in so doing, discouraged individuals from getting their comments in on time to, say House Appropriations Committee on welfare-reform issues (for starters).

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Essentially, once I start talking, I am going to be talking about the context and citing examples, evidence, and lay down a challenge.

Look, across society in the USA, things are sliding downhill fast, and knocking people out of the competition along the way.

Did anyone see this competition, recently?

snowboard-cross.jpg

(link to article below).  It has been compared to a demolition derby.  However –notice these people have snowboards, jackets, boots, and helmets.  They know when they push off, they might get taken out in a moment, maybe even injured — but they will get up and race again another day.  they may not know the whole course, but they know there’s a finish line.  They have sponsors, team-mates and a training regime.

Not so for our nation as a whole.  We have public schools, we have education THROUGHOUT this system and we have been induced to pour billions into the “training” functions of almost every major federal agency, while the same continue to misplace trillions  (this post, below), especially the Dept. of Defense and Housing and Urban Development (HUD).  My category in this subject matter is moreso HHS and to a degree, DOJ.

But we are deliberately NOT being brought into the planning sector — which has been compartmentalized by profession, then centralized through affiliations and institutionalized into leadership from certain universities, which then maintain loyalty to their own (while collaborating on how to run the world).  The leverage has been moved away from individuals.

DOWNHILL SLALOM SNOWBOARD CROSS, SPEEDING, JUICED UP ON LIES,  “STARVATION SLOPE” — and we funded this ourselves, and facilitated it, too.

While some sectors are prospering, they are doing it at the expense of others and because of positioning in the market, or previous positioning in the market. The market is affected by the caste system enabled by the tax system, which sets up nonprofits for some and wage deductions (for taxes) for others; and wage deductions AND child support garnishments for others.

For yet others, their assets (or, if they had none, children) are being stripped out simply through the family courts, conciliation courts and/or “Unified Family Courts,” with presiding judges strapped into the “AFCC*/CRC**/NACC/*** “CFCC” etc. system.

Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Let's Get Honest

February 25, 2014 at 8:44 pm

Navigating My Blog: Table of Contents, Post Titles by Dates Published

leave a comment »

This page will be updated as I can.  I realized I am repeating by phone (and sometimes in post) information already blogged.   Hopefully these are good browsing, a list of subject matter in addition to the links on the sidebar, pages, and sidebar widgets with some chronological narratives.   This represents four-plus years of consistent research driven by an insatiable (so far) desire to know  “How could these things be?” and “What are the alternatives?”    Please feed the blogger; you will NOT find this information assembled elsewhere, and it should’ve been.

One of the questions I ask on this page (middle) is also, “What alternatives do you, plural, want?  Is this really what you want done with your tax dollars?”   With some visuals.

Last Dozen Posts Published  (In Reverse Chrono Order) (from the sidebar; the sidebar content obviously changes with time).

BELOW, in REVERSE CHRONOLOGICAL TABLE FORM, picking up from the Dec. 24, 2013 one above:

A table of post titles going so far back to December 2012 (blog dates from 2009), in reverse chrono order, being assembled as of February 2014.  I’ll add links as I can, however this has to be done from the Admin. site one post, one paste, one row/hyperlink at a time.   Meanwhile, you can look up any post by its date through “Archives” til then.  The titles are statements in themselves of a developing understanding of the field.

“Please Feed the Blogger” Notice:

Also, “please feed the blogger.”  Any idea how much time it takes to research and put up a post?

Below is a section from the sidebar explaining why this blog, and that I’ve been exploring pretty much new and original material/territory* — including what has happened since those who first “dropped the ball” on reporting the HHS grants factor (around 1999-2002) as it affects the courts, and who, specifically dropped it.    This blog is far from book format or indexed, but it’s a very good set of footprints, and with basic commonsense tools plus “show and tell” on lookups, involved.  The information has been picked up and is being brought up, from what I can tell, in re: mid-term Congressional election platforms in two different states.  

* (with exception of the CAFR material, which has good teachers already explaining it well, although I also blogged and continue to tie its huge significance into the family court matters.  CAFRs speak to who is government.  Courts are part of  government).

I am also seeking to get some specific “consciousness-raising” funds eliminated in my own state of California, after having seen just what programs they go to, and having been an eyewitness long term of what “help” consists of (i.e., PR campaigns, technical assistance and training, website constructions, and tax writeoffs, etc.)  This is definitely a real “public interest blog”


These tasks are guaranteed not to make one friends in high places, or among those in authority over the various programs I believe should be defunded.  Much of my blog is politically incorrect, including among the arrogant (in my opinion) “save the world” Baby Boomers expert at promoting world utopia (along with “Pay no attention to our operating structures” which I do anyhow, and report on).  Some of these, it seems, learned in the 1960s, somehow, that being able to change laws then, they are apparently beyond and above the law now.    I disagree, and talk about the consequences of being distracted by “cause” rhetoric.

The same people and their multi-faceted, not-quite-filing nonprofit groups already have their eyes on desired system changes, and the parts slated for elimination are THE parts protecting due process, fiscal accountability to government, and despite all the talks of equality, simply fair play, financially. All people should learn how to understand the basic operating systems of (1) government and (2) self-appointed systems change agent and figure out how these are funded.

Pls. Feed the Blogger in re: About to go Public notice

FYI, I’m about to go public (not on this forum) with my case, naming names, putting it in chronological order, for protection of certain family members, because I am not in safe situation currently. I am in solidarity with anyone who has been put homeless, or nearly homeless year after year by this system WITHOUT having abused others or perpetrated crimes on others, and with people who have lost their children (but not their minds) through the courts, without due process and without legitimate cause.  (Obviously, there are still legitimate reasons for being prevented from contact with one’s children. Unfortunately the most obvious ones in human terms don’t seem to hold much weight in “conciliation” courts with a mind of their own and purposes of their own, like ordering services and centralizing operations).

Read the rest of this entry »

Dividing Lines, State of the Union, Scapegoating the Poor for Sport.

leave a comment »

This post is out of sequence, as I am thinking about the United States of America Budget, and tonight’s State of the Union Address. Please just take it at face value (WYSIWYG); I started out mentioning Food Stamps, considering a typical (?) case I know which shows the alternate route to Food Stamps from self-sufficiency can easily go through the family courts (a particularly egregious case; though there are some in all states, another one I’m following just now from Minnesota), as my case also did. This tells me that even people with going businesses that might be self-sustaining (such as the Georgia case showed) can still lose it all to a single family court judge, and are doing so.

After that, I remembered that this particular judge was on a national council dealing with major federal grants (CJJDP) through the USDOJ, and fleshed it out from here — finishing out these 10,000++ words (most of them quotes) with articles on Food Stamps, and another exhortation to consider what the Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports (CAFRs) have been telling us – taxes are NOT good, they are bad, and at this point, unnecessary.  To see this, you have to get a scope of the number of governments, consider their collective holdings, SEE that these holdings are at a minimum producing interest income, but moreso are held in pooled investments which produce returns.

All that our taxes (particularly the income tax) continue to do is exaggerate and exacerbate the differences between people who make a living with JOBS and those who do not, but instead, buy, sell, and more directly invest in corporations.   You can’t see this without taking a look.   However, some of the information below might persuade SOME of you it’s worth taking a look.  I hope!

I question, for example, why a single company (ICF International) worth $937 million should get $9 million of grants from HHS, half of them devoted to promoting marriage and fatherhood, and many more interesting things…So here goes!…


FOOD STAMPS — FIRST FORCE ‘EM ONTO FOOD STAMPS, THEN, TALKING “BUDGET,” CUT RATIONS:

The State of the Union Address from President Obama is tonight.  I heard this morning, there is a plan to cut $85 billion from Food Stamps, and subsidies to farms.

I’m not familiar with farm subsidies, but I know at least which government operations (called “the courts’) are driving many Americans ONTO Food Stamps needlessly, and Americans are also funding this type of outrage (paying for judges’ salaries, courtrooms, prisons, bailiffs, file clerks, the entire apparatus, and more) every time they work a job and have wages garnished for income taxes, or pay any other kind of sales tax allegedly used to fund government operations at the Federal, or State, or County, or Municipality level, and/or when they use government services.  For example:  get married — a marriage license fee.  Get divorced — a fee for filing dissolution (ever think where those go to?).

Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Let's Get Honest

January 28, 2014 at 7:21 pm

Family Court Injustice

Mom & Kids Need "Just Us" to Fight Family Court Injustice

The Espresso Stalinist

Wake Up to the Smell of Class Struggle ☭

Spiritual Side of Domestic Violence

Finally! The Truth About Domestic Violence and The Church

Legal Schnauzer

Absolutely Uncommon Analysis of Family --and "Conciliation" -- Courts' Operations, Practices, and History

Legal Schnauzer

Absolutely Uncommon Analysis of Family --and "Conciliation" -- Courts' Operations, Practices, and History

ExposingTheRecord.org

Advocates for Change: Tell us about your JUDGE, ATTORNEY (pretender), or CPS...

Cold,Hard.Fact$

On Governmental Cashflow, CAFRs, and Economic Coups

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 267 other followers

%d bloggers like this: