Let's Get Honest! Blog

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

My Posts, Just the List (from April 23, 2014… back to Sept. 24, 2012)

with 2 comments

Table of Contents — (somewhat) Simplified

I started this blog in spring 2009. It is my continuous show-and-tell learning curve exposing, as the motto says, Family and Conciliation Court Operations, Practices, and History from the early 1990s and earlier.

Nothing was posted or added to this table of contents from June 29, 2014 (Broken Courts, Flawed Practices, Parade of Fools) throughout 2015;  on January 23, 2016 (2016 More Business As Usual in MN? (Criminalizing, Terrorizing, Jailing Mothers))  I began publishing again particularly while Minnesota mother Sandra (“Sam”) Grazzini-Rucki sits in jail after having already been cut off from her kids and thrown out of her home years ago, and on less than 24 hours’ notice, having been economically destroyed, and turned into a fugitive (and resources found to hunt her down and haul her back), and now it looks like a serious attempt to personally, physically eliminate her — for felony parental interference.  See first 2016 post for links to more details: I blog from California, not Minnesota and am not an eyewitness or court participant…

Such harsh treatment of any woman / mother is an insult and I’m sure intended as a message to ALL caretaking and formerly custodial mothers whose children were also stolen (in-state) and/or kidnapped (crossing state or country borders) about whom the prosecutors didn’t show even a passing spit’s interest in tracking down the child-stealing or kidnapping parents. Apparently so long as it could be framed as a family dispute and handled within family court system, minimizing the criminal code violation and the devastating impact on the “left-behind” parents…

Despite the Grazzini-Rucki case attracting newsprint in Minnesota (in part through the involvement of a family lawyer –the mother’s — who was also running for GOP Minnesota state justice) there’s still next to no serious discussion among those upset about this — even among those in  Minnesota! — about connections among well-known Minnesota-based elements of “the domestic violence cartel,” (my term, and I can and do document this), a well-known, progressive (but died in a plane crash, about fifteen years ago, with his wife and daughter and staff members) U.S. Senator Pau Wellstonethe Association of Family and Conciliation Courts (in its role as spearheading the family court system, and specialized courts and practices within it, nationwide, and in general favorable, and promoter of “parental alienation” “high-conflict” “Parent coordination” and other terms each of which supports a profession or sets of organizations promising to reduce these in their clients), and of multiple deals apparently cut, and strategic collaborations over the decades between the “DV cartel” and the “family-court-connected” nonprofits and those on the federal marriage/fatherhood/family/faith-based-values funding streams.

Although elements of the DV+FamilyCourt-Connected+Faith/Family/Marriage/(and especially)Fatherhood groups are distributed among different states (meaning, unless one is aware of how networks are set up and that they exist, they’re in effect, a hidden influence to most of the public), specific groups in Minnesota have impacted BOTH the domestic violence movement itself (from almost the start) AND marriage/fatherhood promotion AND promotion of the family courts as treatment centers for social diseases (such as child abuse or domestic violence, etc.).  The history and impact of those organization I have found to be fascinating, illuminating, and a significant explanation of how it is sometimes impossible to actually complete any contested custody case in under ten years, or before one or both parties are bankrupted, or one is in jail, or somebody is missing — or even dead.   What kind of “justice” is that?  What does it have to do with justice — anything?


There is little discussion about organizations AS organizations and how they are networked with each other from positions of power (social and financial) to set the major currents of how individual cases can, and do, spin out of control. These do not happen in a vacuum — they happen when people are run through certain institutions run by certain types of individuals…whose professions, livelihoods, and social position stem from those positions. There is next to no discussion about taxed individuals vs. tax-exempt foundations, associations, and organizations as a means of social control and organizations OUTSIDE of government and any legal rights to due process. This is what I discuss because it’s what I found — early on– in looking at the history of the family courts, and the role of federal grants.
Read the rest of this entry »

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

with one comment

WIDGETS:  This post contains essentially two or three of this blog’s sidebar text-boxes (“widgets”), each designed for total strangers, novices, and/or followers.  They are to alert, expose new readers to key concepts and themes by immersing them into the narrative, and leaving footprints (links) for the curious. And to keep reminding us of basic information which has been forgotten through advocacy-group neglect over (as of 2014) a period of 15-20 years minimum.  To understand this information is also to get a grasp on the essence of the relationship between “government” and the individual, and to call more individuals to wise up to how this works.


Citizenship is an economic contract; it is a concession of power for implied mutual benefit. The party entering (or even born, but then became adult under) this contract has no excuse for failing to monitor the other party to the contract.  Ignorance may be the cause, and ignorance of the significance of welfare reform, or of simply paying taxes, doesn’t exempt one from the consequences of it.
Read the rest of this entry »

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

with 3 comments

The “CAFR” topic is a governmental accounting and reporting practice which affects all people (and particularly in this situation, all US Citizens) because of its impact on the economy and our understanding of the size and scope of government operations. It is an over-arching and underlying issue, but it has been a hidden issue.


For example, as Carl Herman (Harvard Economics grad) put this in 2012, a very good question in my opinion:

This is a “README” article! // Let’s Get Honest

CAFR summary: if $600B ‘fund’ can’t fund $27B pension, $16B budget deficit, why have it?(Posted on June 18, 2012 by Carl Herman),

. . . Governor Brown is silent about the $600 billion in surplus cash and investments, claiming the $16 billion budget deficit can only be addressed by austerity – massive funding cuts to our essential infrastructure. A 2.8% divestment of the fund would cover the $16 billion deficit.

So the natural question is if the state’s withholding of $600 billion in our cash and investments does not fund pensions, address a budget deficit, or prevent devastation to infrastructure, how can we best restructure the purpose and use of OUR MONEY for optimal public benefits? ~

Actually, my response would be why should we continuing giving the same authorities MORE money for pensions — not to be used to fund pensions?? Is this typical state stewardship (??). If so, what does that say about taxation in general? Where’s the real “WE” in that equation? …. Seems more like an “Us/Them” proposition, in practice…. (sarcasm added 1/26/2016).

This post also has some discussions on Title IV of Social Security Act, which relates more directly to family court matters, and links to it.

[Link to “Title IV” — scroll down to see what are parts IV-A, B,(C), D and E:    Title IV-A {{BLOCK GRANTS TO STATES FOR TEMPORARY ASSISTANCE FOR NEEDY FAMILIES}},IV-B {{CHILD AND FAMILY SERVICES Subparts 1: Stephanie Tubbs Jones Child Welfare Services Program and 2: Promoting Safe and Stable Families [PSSF]}}, IV-C {{repealed}}, IV-D {{CHILD SUPPORT AND ESTABLISHMENT OF PATERNITY, including, for example, such invasive record-keeping bureaucracy as these:***}} and last but not least, IV-E {{FEDERAL PAYMENTS TO STATES FOR FOSTER CARE AND ADOPTION ASSISTANCE}}

Notice each section (A, B, D and E) has its respective allotments or payments to states.  Or, both. It would be good to memorize which Title addresses which subject matter.  Also, I have found (very relevant) information on some of the grants I studied under the CFR (Code of Federal Regulations) pertaining to that section.  From the “Link to Title IV,” here’s  a summary of where to look for which parts:

Title IV of the Social Security Act is administered by the Department of Health and Human Services. The Office of Family Assistance administers benefit payments under Title IV, Parts A and C. {{now repealed, it says}} The Administration for Public Services, Office of Human Development Services, administers social services under Title IV, Parts B and E. The Office of Child Support Enforcement administers the child support program under Title IV, Part D.

Title IV appears in the United States Code as §§601–687, subchapter IV, chapter 7, Title 42.

Regulations of the Secretary of Health and Human Services relating to Title IV are contained in chapters II, III, and XIII, Title 45, Code of Federal Regulations. Regulations of the Secretary of Labor relating to Title IV are contained in subtitle A, Title 29, and chapter 29, Title 41, Code of Federal Regulations.

Understanding that even with just “Title 42,” we are dealing with a mammoth enterprise, federally enabled (and under HHS, it’s organized regionally — see my sidebar links on “Social Sciencification” and “Regionalization”) Look at the rest of U.S. Code §§601-687, subchapter IV, Chapter 7, Title 42:

U.S. Code: Title 42 – THE PUBLIC HEALTH AND WELFARE — Look at the Chapters Surrounding Chapter 7 here:

Read the rest of this entry »

ORPHANS: Where The Great Commission meets the Military-Industrial Complex

with one comment

NOTE: Intro. section in this background color added [free of charge] Jan. 2016, some years after original publication May 2013. “Nightlight Christian Adoptions” was mentioned in the original post, I’ve just been looking more closely at tax return contents, in the interim. The original post may have been more “inspired,” however…. //LGH….It deals with this topic:

NOTE: this 3,000 word (you’re welcome!) post is out of sequence — belongs back with the “On the Road to Emmaeus” and “”Christian Social Services: Replenishing the Ranks of the Faithful (Bethany Christian Services posts, ca. Eastertime, 2013.

  • 6723 Whittier, McLean, VA (Always Look Up Street Addresses!!!)**

…at one time or another these organizations (at a minimum) shared a street address:

  • SHAOHANNAH’S HOPE (later “SHOWHOPE”)
  • CONGRESSIONAL COALITION ON ADOPTION INSTITUTE (“CCAI”)
  • CHRISTIAN ALLIANCE FOR ORPHANS (“CAFO”)
  • ASSOCIATION OF FORMER INTELLIGENCE OFFICERS (“AFIO”)

File under, if you notice the details, What’s wrong with this picture?

HHS Grant Category of Federal Domestic Assistance:

93007 Public Awareness Campaigns on Embryo Adoption
Recipient Name City State ZIP Code County DUNS Number Sum of Awards
NIGHTLIGHT CHRISTIAN ADOPTIONS  FULLERTON CA 92831-3846 ORANGE 081794034 $ 5,893,123

Read the rest of this entry »

CDRC and Friends: Ever Wonder How All that MANDATORY Mediation, Alternate Dispute Resolution, etc. got passed? [May 15, 2013]

with one comment

Fall, 2014 update: This 12,000-word post is “sticky” (stuck to the top of the blog) because it illustrates how any special interest group already involving certain sectors of civil servants or other positions of influence (for example, at law schools) can lobby state legislatures and US Congress year after year through nonprofit associations. I have written an update and expect to publish it as a separate post, soon.
In this post also see:

This gets “more than” interesting when I looked up the incorporator — just one person, Joel A. Shawn, Esq. of “Friedman, Shawn, Sloan & Ross.” (1981) filing.  Because the California OAG site doesn’t display previous to 2000 or so (and nothing previous to about 2004 is even showing on this nonprofit), I see no mention of Dr. Kelly – although I’m sure the paperwork on file.

the NORTHERN CALIFORNIA MEDIATION CENTER

(in San Rafael, just north of San Francisco) was registered as a corporation by ONE lawyer, Joel A. Shawn, of  FRIEDMAN, SLOAN, SHAWN & ROSS



[May 2013 post below:]
This is a combination of what I took OUT of “Flipping Cause and Effect: AFCC Rhetoric” (“Got custody killings?  Blame it on the bad language”) post — when the website I was reviewing brought up “Jay Folberg” as Dean of USF Law.

I [“Let’s Get Honest”] have been advising parents (in particular) to figure out WHO in the lobbying, rules-of-court-changing, profession-inventing, task-force-chairing State by State Supreme Court (or thereabouts) legal/judicial powerhouses — has AFCC affiliations, or at least has drunk that Kool-Aid.  As a handle, it’s definitely an indicator. Many symptoms accompany membership. When a certain panorama of symptoms shows up (this particular post shows most of them, like idiocy**) then the diagnosis “AFCC” is probably pretty accurate, whether or not it’s on the website already as a nametag…

** “Idiocy” referring to linguistic jumps in logic and labeling that really did lead a particular professional from Southern California to blame custody-killings on bad language.  For more information (and to identify an AFCC professional’s previous involvement in a case ending (?) with the massacre of 8 people in a Seal Beach, California Hair Salon), see “footnotes” to that “Flipping Cause and Effect” post.

The confusion is innate; it is intentional, and it has a purpose — where there is confusion, who gets to come in and settle the conflict?

Apparently AFCC exists and was originally organized, in part as a gas-lighting (“crazymaking”) organization = a deliberate lobbying outfit for forcing linguistic change away from the criminal codes into the behavioral health language la-la land; which purpose their site admits has been “on the books” as a corporate plan (mission/goal) since the 1970s.
Read the rest of this entry »

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

with 15 comments

(Originally published 2/5/2013) A key issue in the courts includes sexual assault and violence towards women and children. This has also been a key issue with psychoanalysis. 

Below the introduction, most of the post is about the Stunning Validation, but I keep it current and relevant –because it is! — to the subject matter of this blog.  

The key, or leading edge, feature OF these courts includes therapeutic jurisprudence, attempting to resolve conflict through addition of behavioral health professionals, the fields in which Dr. Nicholas J. 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:

Dr. Cummings is a visionary who, for half a century not only was able to foresee the future of professional psychology, but also helped create it. A former president of the American Psychological Association (APA) as well as its Divisions 12 (Clinical Psychology) and 29 (Psychotherapy), he formed a number of national organizations in response to trends. Since organized psychology resisted these inevitable changes, Dr. Cummings blazed the way, expecting others would follow. He launched the professional school movement by founding the four campuses of the California School of Professional Psychology that established clinicians as full-fledged members of the faculty. As chief of mental health for the Kaiser Permanente health system in the 1950s, he wrote and implemented the first prepaid psychotherapy contract in the era when psychotherapy was an exclusion rather than a covered benefit in health insurance. He wrote what is known as the freedom-of-choice legislation that requires insurers to reimburse psychologists along with psychiatrists, and he conducted the medical cost offset research showing that psychological interventions save medical/surgical dollars.

Foreseeing the industrialization of healthcare, and particularly behavioral healthcare, he founded American Biodyne, the nation’s first and only psychology-driven managed behavioral health organization (MBHO), to be emulated so that the profession could own managed behavioral care before it fell into the hands of business interests. For two years he limited enrollment to 500,000 covered lives, but when the professions of psychology and psychiatry ignored the model, he took his foot off the brake, and the number of covered lives soared to 14.5 million in the next 5 years and to 25 million shortly thereafter. Other organizations he founded included the National Academies of Practice (the 150 most distinguished practitioners in each of dentistry, medicine, nursing, optometry, osteopathic medicine, pharmacy, pediatric medicine, psychology, social work, and veterinary medicine), the National Council of Professional Schools of Psychology (NCSPP), the San Joaquin County Psychological Association, and the American Managed Behavioral Healthcare Association (AMBHA). With others he co-founded the California Psychological Association, the San Francisco Bay Area Psychological Association, and the Council for the Advancement of the Psychological Professions and Sciences (CAPPS)

Cummings 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.

And it’s really time to read Masson’s statement of “The Assault on Truth, The Origins of Psychoanalysis .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, OurBrokenFamily Court” isn’t. It ain’t “Ours” and it ain’t “Broken.” That phrase is a “tell.” I’ll tell you why…. [excerpt:]

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

with 11 comments

Originally published 1/24/2013. This Post is Sticky (one of 9 sticky posts) meaning, it stays near the top. Current posts show below all sticky posts. 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! Includes Marv Bryer’s discoveries, especially in the mid- to late 1990s.

Exposing and Prosecuting Judicial Corruption Through Common Law Discovery

1997 interview with Marv Bryer.
[I ASK READERS: ] Can you read 7 pages “for the cause”? And think about it?
If given a brief pop-quiz of about 10th grade level on what it’s talking about, how much of the vocabulary or ideas could you remember?
Read the rest of this entry »

While We’re There — the Northern California Mediation Center . . . and ITS corporate records, history, people, etc.

with 4 comments

[ca. 8,000 words.    Significant additions after publishing.NCMC   introduced as to corporate filings, some personnel. Post concludes  showing how “parental alienation” indoctrination happens,is self-perpetuating, and is hostile towards mothers, generally, and is definitely a marketable scheme [yes, scheme] as well. See “train-the-trainers” @ public cost mentality.In midstream, I’m taking (to another post) a basic explanation of what “Corporation” means, FYI]


We might as well talk about the Northern California Mediation Center alongside  The Judith Wallerstein Center for the Family in Transition, and right alongside respective corporate and nonprofit filings, fundings, tax returns affiliations and actions.{{The introduction is a little passionate, but it’s about a dozen paragraphs.  Scroll down if you want to skip them!  I added numbers to make it easier!}}
Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Let's Get Honest

September 22, 2012 at 9:55 pm

Another POV on “The Center for the Family in Transition” (and its funders)

with 3 comments

Excerpt pulled to top of post in 2016.  This sticky post (below which are more current ones) originally published 9/22/2012.  It should be put in bold print, large letters and stuck on a refrigerator IF one is stuck in divorce drama at this time, as a reminder of the resonance of the rooms it will be taking place in!
The phrase “Families in Transition” is jargon, and it is virtually trademarked for use in the courts.  The term comes from, it seems, ONE individual with key connections to psychoanalysis (Judith Wallerstein, who was married to Robert S. Wallerstein, also a devoted and highly placed psychoanalyst, at one time President of the International Psychoanalytic Association (“IPA”), essentially the inheritance of Sigmund Freud. 


This association, IPA, was formed shortly AFTER Sigmund Freud’s excommunication (by colleagues) for ca. 1895 presenting “the Etiology of Hysteria” and saying it related to violent sexual and physical assaults on his patients by their caretakers (often fathers or uncles, etc.) from the early 1900s).   In the 1950s, “The Origins of Psychoanalysis” incl. editor Sigmund’s daughter Anna) apparently included censorship of how Freud viewed his own “about-face” after being cold-shouldered by his colleagues.  In the 1980s a man was given access to the Freud Archives and wrote about this, in the interest of speaking the truth, and was again could-shouldered, and taken off the archives also.


For more, see March 5, 2014 post “Suppose I’m Right Here ….What Would You Do When the Lights go on?” Seeing the Wallerstein-Wallerstein connection, and the consistent practice of re-framing reality (truths about person-to-person violence, including parent to child, man to woman, and vice versa), and the origins of the fields of psychoanalysis, psychiatry, psychology, get it? the “Psyche” field in general  having been introduced as the bedrock formula for the conception of “FAMILY” and the “FAMILY COURTS,” a logical deduction is that those courts are also essentially — not “tangentially” —  crooked.

So, how can that “crooked” be cleaned up?  Can it?  Does the propagation of truth versus the propagation of the coverup of the (often ugly) truth matter, or not?  If it does not matter, how can calling something “justice” be applied on top of that foundation?

Read the rest of this entry »

2016 More Business As Usual in MN? (Criminalizing, Terrorizing, Jailing Mothers)

with 2 comments

I’ve been aware of an ongoing, escalating situation in Dakota County, Minnesota, involving a jailed mother facing multiple felony charges, a no doubt jubilant father undergoing reunification with his runaway teenaged daughters,  three (male) journalists who helped keep the police on-target, and pending felony charges for three others (one-and-a-half married couples) who allegedly helped with parental interference resulting from a custody order issued in the family court.


This mother of five became a fugitive long before she was accused of felony parental interference.  See news reports (some, below), and footnote, a  3/14/2013 post from the blog Carver County Corruption at the bottom of this post. The post dates to about a month before the girls ran away. It names involved professionals, but to those who pay attention, it also shows involved systems (such as child support) and the existence of family wealth as an incentive to “churn the case.”


I want to call attention to what this, including this case, means for women (particularly mothers) and will continue to mean regardless of who (Democrat or Republican) is elected next President of the USA.

I want to talk about the off-stage actors, the executive producers, involved in any and all custody disputes in America.  I want to talk about the behind-the-curtain scripts which are running along the same lines throughout the country.

A business model is a business model.  Jailed mothers, righteously-indignant fathers supported by journalists, and runaway/reunified teenagers is not about law, justice, or representative government gone awry, gone “rogue.”  It’s about the same government having been outsourced and outflanked by the for-profit/not-for-profit [tax-exempt, privately controlled] corporate wealth working through (and with) public institutions. It’s also about what happens when the population goes to sleep on the above; on public/private coordinated operations which cross multiple jurisdictions.

Did I mention, it’s about moving the money, local, intermediate, inter/national?

This case, and that it’s possible in this country, is a power-play by those involved, which always comes with a “spin” to justify the excess force inflicted.  These outrageous custody cases, decade after decade, are therefore predictable outcomes of the larger business model in place, particularly but not only in the family court venues.
Read the rest of this entry »

Yes, Broken Courts, Flawed Practices, and the Parade of Fools: (Pt.1(a) Intro, Context)

with 12 comments

 [Published June 29, 2014; Post in edit mode late July-Aug. 2014;  expanded to almost double the size,nearly 24,000 words; with background info….In most posts, a lot of the length is simply quotes,  my style is not just tell, but  “show and tell.”]

February 2016 Personal Update:

Without changing the contents here (except one paragraph or so,  cleaning up some formatting and adding tags), I’ll mention that the MAJOR break in posting anything between June 29, 2014 and early 2016 came because my personal situation heated up so much after I went public on fiduciary abuse by an older sister — who’d played a crucial role in supporting/enabling (if not inciting) our original “custody war,” after playing a negligible, passive, codependent, domestic-violence-enabling role the previous decade, after learning that I was a battered wife and mother and seeking intervention.

From summer 2014 – early 2015, the situation went into probate court — lasting in total, nearly a year, to finish transition.  Throughout 2015 I was working with and renegotiating standards with personnel in control of my resources, and continuing to withhold access to evidence of the paper trail….From summer 2014 – 2016, I was still writing things up, investigating, communicating privately with some individuals — but also had to spend major time, that’s writing time, and to lawyer, sister, starting with unearthing a written commitment on her part, yes/no — are you resigning or not? Then, requesting to settle out of court (which is possible under California code and the individual trust), which (of course) was rejected, stringing the process out, adding more professionals (not that I had some for protection on this end).

In 2015, a major transition dealing with new people — major negotiation time, and now as the year 2015 closed out  and so far in 2016– I find myself again fighting for housing, and to obtain financial records, which certain people don’t want found. Both my (so to speak — father no longer involved, and I was prevented from continued involvement years earlier) young adult children now being out of the state, I had hoped to move on with life, and promptly move out of present housing.  I found — “not so” from certain personnel, and that “not so” is in one of the most effective forms of messing with other human beings — litigation absent the supporting facts (and here, even proof of standing) as a form of extortion, which like some of the other things this blog talks about (child-stealing, wife-beating, stalking, terroristic threats on individuals, statements under penalty of perjury which are, well, known to be falsehoods by those speaking, these are criminal issues.

In these conditions, struggling with wordpress HTML and getting out a post, wasn’t going to happen. I’ve been working at a different format to start uploading what did, still, continue learning during the non-posting time. We shall see…. Anyhow, that’s why no follow-up parts to this post occurred, much as I would’ve liked to complete them.  There are plenty in draft, and I am posting again.   There are still plenty of survival-level challenges, which means that about the only relief  or “down-time” still involves this kind of blogging anyhow —

and in continuing to blog I am still thinking about the next generation, particularly of those who may have been trafficked, traded and repeatedly disrupted (UNLESS they come into an abusive home, it seems — then the “don’t disrupt” theme seems to prevail) like commodities between and among parent/non-parent caretakers — all rationalized and presided over in the institutions run by privately-networked in organizations & with those in government positions  people (judges, experts, and social science research & demo projects building their resumes and journaling their findings) “IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST” and in the name of “NON-ADVERSARIAL COURT PROCEEDINGS,” “REDUCING CONFLICT” and of course Treating and Healing the scourges of wife-battering and child abuse [“SUPERVISED VISITATION / BATTERERS INTERVENTION”], for “Futures without Violence” “Safe Horizons” “Justice” (a common label on oh so many organizations), FAMILY reunification, preservation, (…. Responsible Fatherhood, Healthy Marriages, Access and Visitation — all such good, wonderful, noble things…) and my favorite term when applied to what allegedly MUST happen between perps and those perpetrated-upon: “CONCILIATION.” Unless parental alienation was perpetrated upon someone in a high-conflict relationship, in which case cold-turkey quarantining of the offender with de-programming for the alienated minor children.

Maybe we should call these courts something more appropriate to what takes place in them — like virtual auction blocks, or stock markets in human lives, with some able to profit so well in the field, they can as majority shareholders, demand changes in management, streamlined efficiency and increased return to shareholders, futures, options, the whole deal, on the profits of churning individual human beings’ relationships under the banner of helping society — and of course anyone “low-income” adjust to business as usual.

// Thanks for Readers’ Patience,  including with some of the formatting in reading through existing posts, or if you were expecting new ones that didn’t come timely…., LGH (“Let’s Get Honest) 2/6/2016.

 Between “Pts.1” [1a and 1b] and “Pt.2” I expect to post more material on the Family Court Enhancement Project (“FCEP”), which I understand is all the talk about town (i.e., on the internet in these circles (use your search function to find some of it…).   So the title of this blog refers to a series.  It is a natural continuation of the recent (and from May 2012) “Parades, Charades and Facades,” and my posting this is keeping a personal promise (to myself) for the year 2014, to expose what’s underneath the rhetoric.

These parades, charades, and facades have become a problem for the people who match the profile of what they claim to represent, “Protective Parents” and/or “Battered Mothers,” specifically. I am among that class and a witness of the practices, tactics, and censorships of dialogues involved. I believe collectively the groups involved comprise a cult, and exhibit all primary cult practices.


Before a few mental circuits of distressed parents disconnect, or melt from the heat of their own righteous indignation, (“But my children were abused; I am an incest survivor” etc.), this post is not about whether or not incest or abuse took place in those cases, or children are being placed in the care of batterers or dangerous parents. I’m a survivor, and I know that plenty of times, abuse, sometimes incest did take place and children ARE being placed in the care of batterers.  Mine were….


This post is about what kind of parents are taking a road trip (real, or virtually) with ANY advocacy organizations whose articles of incorporation (if any) boards of directors on their tax returns and patterns of incorporation, charitable filings they have not yet even identified (let alone read and understood), and what’s worse to a destination they have not evaluated as sensible, based on analyses of those organizations in the larger context.

It’s about the dangers of tunnel vision.  Focus is one thing, but tunnel vision, an entirely different thing. it’s about how even spending days, weeks and months on a combination of social media, group -emails, individual emails, and even supplemented by various published articles on a certain topic can still be like eating white bread and peanut butter only, and wondering why you can’t make it through the marathon.

It’s so easy to get a sense of TIME (date of origin of a group), PLACE (where did it originally incorporated, and if it’s one of those state-skipping chameleon corporations, make a note of it, and find out where it’s been before), SIZE (for that, see the financials), and POSITIONING (who else is it interlocking agenda with; and — this is important — is it talking from a religious-exempt institution, or from a law school, or center/institute (etc.) at a university, or individually.  Universities, hospitals, government represent considerable clout, prestige and authority, and lesser accountability for said “Center” or Institute” when it comes to tracking the funding = tracking the influence.  Is it a regular HHS grantee? On which federal funding streams?

How much does anyone involved really know, as an abuse survivor or simply as a taxpayer, about the USDOJ/OVW (Office of Violence Against Women) funding streams proceeding from passage and subsequent re-authorizations of the Violence Against Women Act (1994ff) and who’s on them, who’s advising them?  What about the people who have been directors of that Office? (Two — Bea Hanson and the Hon. Susan B. Carbon — in this post).  What are their affiliations, where did they come from policy-wise and professionally?


For some clues:  See the 31 tags I added in 2016 from skimming the contents of this oversized 6/29/2014 post?


Who could, from having looked at these things, give an impromptu list of at least six key nonprofit associations, institutes, or organizations involved in these matters and give a two-minute summary of how they interact with each other, or characterize the six groups involved?


I could, but I certainly didn’t learn it overnight. I did, however, learn by continuing to pay attention year after year, and understand some of the key indicators. I don’t see why anyone else who decides to pay attention couldn’t also become knowledgeable and an alternate INDEPENDENT, and at least REASONABLY AUTHORITATIVE point of reference for distressed parents and confused bystanders, let alone for personal understanding of the times we live in.

Does it file separately — or has it got another organization as its fiscal agent?  If that status changed (example in this post), when, and probably why?


This post is about advocacy group supporters and followers failing to set standards and keep their own leaders ethical. In a larger sense, the same goes for all of us as citizens, supporting by personal energy and labor (i.e., government revenues) — how can we keep leaders honest or ethical if we don’t have a grasp of what they are doing, what they are paid to do, and how the system is organized?


Consider: If as a parent, you would NOT want your kids to get into a strange cars with smiling strangers and start hitch-hiking with them, for years, recruiting others as you go, why have you demonstrated this same behavior by failing to do basic look-ups, and obtain those fiscal identities and trade-association connections?

[Example: Child-Justice, Inc. (Eileen King, fall 2012] connections to First Star = connections to NACC = connections to AFCC. Another: Battered Women’s Justice Project [“BWJP”] connections (ongoing) to AFCC AND to Duluth, MN’s “Domestic Abuse Intervention Programs” [connection to Ellen Pence, the HHS and DOJ-funded DV industry programming] AND recently, presenting at “BMCC” (Battered Mother’s Custody Conference).


Why would BMCC (and Mr. Bancroft and Mr. Goldstein) keep a ten-year silence (as if they were unaware of its existence) on what has been a $150 million/year federal since 1996 financing program around marriage and fatherhood promotion by way of diversions from Title IV-A, welfare, or the $10 million/year since 1996 (though first financed in 1988) Title IV-D (re: child support enforcement incentives, including percentage-based quotas) access visitation grants? Possibly because out of some of this funding comes the batterers intervention and supervised visitation networked industries, with solid income streams from court-ordered services, courtesy US taxpayers and privately, individual, extorted parents?


One significant “Why?” unanswered ought to indicate something seriously “off,” but there are many — far too many — significant unanswered questions in this company. Suggestion: Come to a decision on the “why” and act on it. Insist on answers as a condition of telling your stories through these channels, lending credibility as the voice of the victims, as a condition of attending rallies, or advertising rallies, etc. BE WISE!


WHO are the friends of those empathetic friends? WHO are they leading you to?
Get the group corporate, fiscal, identity first (the process is simple)! It is a basic indicator and a source of valuable information. It’s unbelievable what a single EIN# and, from there, tax return (Form 990) will tell. Groups tend to cluster around favorite themes (and shun conflicting themes) and even named groups, simply on-line associations, may be dealing with — or have been started by — a tax-exempt organization with an agenda. In fact, every organization is supposed to state its purpose on their tax return — so if one exists, why not go read it?
Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Let's Get Honest

June 29, 2014 at 1:37 pm

Posted in 1996 TANF PRWORA (cat. added 11/2011), AFCC, Business Enterprise, Cast, Script, Characters, Scenery, Stage Directions, Checking Out a Nonprofit (HowTo), Domestic Violence vs Family Law, History of Family Court, Lethality Indicators - in News, Organizations, Foundations, Associations NGO Hybrids, PhDs in Psychology-Psychiatry etc (& AFCC), Train-the-Trainers Technical Assistance Grantees, Who's Who (bio snapshots)

Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Parades, Charades and Facades — Mother’s Day and Beyond

with 3 comments

[about 3,200 words, plus a section on the Guggenheim Family and Foundations = about 3,000 more, making it about 6,000 words…  It links to  post on another of my blogs “The Family Court Franchise System,” quoting parts of it here. As I often do, the original writing is closer to the bottom of the post, and the top part is context. I brought in the philanthropy  examples in preparation for specific situations in upcoming posts, and not just in a random reference.]


Seeing as it’s almost Father’s Day, I thought it was time to put out a post inspired this past May, 2014, on Mother’s Day, after revisiting one I’d drafted on a different but related blog in 2012.  The basic dynamics it described haven’t changed.

Along the lines of the recent post Accounting Literacy Matters.  Cause-based Literacy Doesn’t (even though it’s dealing with a different topic), I then looked again (hindsight sure does help) at some of the players helping compile various Judges’  or Attorneys’ ToolKits” which, I guess, we are to hope might function as some magic wand, or special panacea, if  waved around in hearings for custody and visitation matters after having separated because of domestic violence, or for general knowledge.

Excerpt, and basically about:

How California Protective Parents Association  Doesn’t — and Why

It was drafted in 2012, and finished, of course, supplemented, in 2014. Related “exhibit”

The fine print (footnotes) to that sheet revealed  “good cop/bad cop” discussions in one put out by the ABA Commission on Domestic Violence.  As usual, taking a second look leads to more information about who’s been backing all the policy studies, for example the Harry Frank Guggenheim Foundation *backing a well-known social scientist at the University of Pennsylvania, who also turns out to be AFCC-friendly:

*Harry Guggenheim established this foundation to support research on violence, aggression, and dominance because he was convinced that solid, thoughtful, scholarly and scientific research, experimentation, and analysis would in the end accomplish more than the usual solutions impelled by urgency rather than understanding. We do not yet hold the solution to violence, but better analyses, more acute predictions, constructive criticisms, and new, effective ideas will come in time from investigations such as those supported by our grants.

The foundation places a priority on the study of urgent problems of violence and aggression in the modern world and also encourages related research projects in neuroscience, genetics, animal behavior, the social sciences, history, criminology, and the humanities which illuminate modern human problems. Grants have been made to study aspects of violence related to youth, family relationships, media effects, crime, biological factors, intergroup conflict related to religion, ethnicity, and nationalism, and political violence deployed in war and sub-state terrorism, as well as processes of peace and the control of aggression.

[from “FAMILY” hyperlink on the site ] All men are not violent, and all violent men are not alike. We encourage more research into typologies of violence and the implications for treatment of distinguishing different types of batterers. However, explanations for spouse abuse must also recognize that two people contribute to a dysfunctional marriage, and the dynamics of family relationships should be explored to understand family violence more completely. The ways both masculinity and femininity are understood in particular cultures should be explored in order to explain how male dominance and marital violence are “normalized” in different and similar ways across cultures. …

Does that not shed some light on why certain people would rather study domestic violence perpetrators and batterers than actively separate them from their victims, PERIOD, sending a public policy message to others that this is socially unacceptable?   And why some are prone to publishing where the grants money is (“let’s characterize batterers and provide and evaluate treatment interventions”) than expecting it to stop by separating the batterer from the battered, as a deterrent, and sending a message that it’s completely unacceptable? (including if women are perpetrating….)

Read the post to find out which Pennsylvania sociologist I’m referring to.


 

Would I have known this if I didn’t look behind the rhetoric?  NO.  I read.  I never heard of “Harry Frank Guggenheim” foundation, although the Guggenheim family are well known as philanthropists.  Harry Frank (1890-1971) was born into this family of eight sons and wealth from various industries, especially smelting.

The Guggenheim Family (Jennifer Schaub, Grand Valley State grad student, 2005):

The Guggenheim Family left a strong mark in the industrial smelting industry of the early 1900’s. By 1918 Forbes reckoned that the Guggenheims were the second richest family in America (Kaufmann 2004). However, they are more widely remembered as a long line of philanthropists. Five key philanthropists have emerged from this extensive family. By creating a series of foundations, the family is credited for promoting the development of individuals {{??}} by funding research and the development of scholarly thought.  . . .

Historic Roots

Meyer Guggenheim (1828-1905) was a tailor of Swiss-Jewish decent who immigrated to the United States in 1847 (John Simon Guggenheim Foundation, Oppenheim, 2002). He and his wife had eight sons. Meyer created the family fortune in the late 19th century beginning with 300,000 from an investment in railroad stocks (Oppenheim, 2002). From there he moved to importing Swiss embroidery and then eventually into the production of metals including silver copper and lead (Infoplease, the John Simon Guggenheim Memorial Foundation). Meyer started the Philadelphia Smelting and Refining Company, and eventually took over American Smelting in 1901. At one time the Guggenheim family was said to control 31 industrial, import, and farming companies in the US and abroad (Wooster, 2005) ….

Daniel Guggenheim (1856-1930) was credited for shaping much of the family business; he combined and presided over, the Guggenheim and American Smelting companies. Solomon Robert Guggenheim (1981-1949) was also active in the family business creating mining strong holds most notably in Colombia (The John Simon Guggenheim Memorial Foundation). Simon Guggenheim (1867-1941) was for a short time, a Republican Senator for Colorado, and the chief ore buyer for family factory. He worked in Colorado for a number of years overseeing the Leadville mines (American Israeli Cooperative Enterprise)….

Harry Frank Guggenheim (1890-1971) was the son of Daniel Guggenheim. Harry fought in two world wars and was the ambassador to Cuba from 1929-1933. Harry was also the co-founder, along with his wife Alicia Patterson, of Newsday Magazine (Newsday.com).

Peggy Guggenheim (1898-1979), the daughter of Benjamin, was an art collector and gallery owner. Noted as one of the most important art patrons of the 1930s and 40s. She owned and operated 3 galleries in the US and Europe. Her New York gallery, Art of This Century was one of the first to show such artists as Rothko, Pollock, Dali, Moore, and Brenton (The Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum).

Importance

As a philanthropist, Daniel Guggenheim is best known as an aviation pioneer. Along with his wife Florence, and their son Harry, Daniel Guggenheim created the Daniel Guggenheim Fund for the promotion of Aeronautics in June 16, 1926 (Wooster, 2005). While the fund was operational, it invested 2.6 million for the creation of aeronautical schools and research centers at 11 different universities. By conducting competitions to create innovations, and funding the research of individuals, projects sponsored by Daniel Guggenheim are said to have increased the safety of Aeronautics …

[para. out of order]

  • Robert H. Goddard (1882-1945) was a physics professor whose contributions to rocket science included a rocket that could travel in a vacuum, and one of the first high altitude rockets. For these and other aeronautical innovations, Goddard has been named one of Time’s 100 Most Important People of the Century. Goddard’s research was funded by Harry Guggenheim for 4 years and the Daniel and Florence Guggenheim Foundation for 11 years (Kluger).

Although Harry Guggenheim also financially contributed to the Daniel Guggenheim fund he began his own foundation, the Harry Frank Guggenheim Foundation, which was formed to contribute critical thought and analyses of the world issues of violence and conflict (The Harry Frank Guggenheim Foundation).

Solomon Guggenheim began collecting non-objective paintings in 1929, and began the Solomon R. Guggenheim Foundation to purchase and increase the appreciation of modern art. After beginning to amass a large collection, Solomon began plans to create the Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum in New York Solomon died before his project was complete and Harry Guggenheim saw to the completion of his Uncle Solomon’s dream (The Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum).

[[…Also the Guggenheims, or their foundations, funded:  composer Aaron Copland, artist Jackson Pollock [“American Abstract Expressionism”] , and Charles Augustus Lindbergh.]]

[…obviously this is just a sampler of information …]

The world we now live in has been vastly influenced by industrialists of last century; of the late 1800s and early 1900s.  Some of them were challenged on their monopolies and faced anti-trust actions; any biography of such families shows how they acquire their wealth, diversify often, and set up major foundations, in part as great public relations (sometimes necessary considering how the wealth was acquired), and in return for this, get to restructure the world and institutions we live in — because their wealth and influence enabled them to.

When it comes to a MAJOR aspect of the family courts, ordering treatment for abnormal or violent behavior (or, originally, to avoid divorce) — we can see today that many of the professionals and professors of course owe their studies, and sometimes the centers or institutes, or even schools at which they teach and research — to philanthropists.


We should be looking at this.  When I saw this connection, I better understood what’s the fascination with “treating” everyone, including “batterers,” and families.  It makes NO sense to me to continue dialogues “pretending” the professor/researcher classes are not themselves funded by either private foundations, or government grants, or both, and that we are all on an equal playing field when it comes to setting major policies in the courts, without discussing the power and money behind them — and the power of private wealth to direct public policy.

FOR EXAMPLE — in SAN DIEGO, and regarding GALs:

In the field of Child Welfare Law — here’s an example.  The group “Children’s Advocacy Institute,” which I will post on shortly — has influenced family courts through, with others, pushing for more “counsel for the child” in contested custody cases, a.k.a., adding GALs wherever possible.  Previously, the same professor was NOT interested in family or children’s issues at all, but instead public, environmental, energy (utility) laws.

Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Let's Get Honest

June 12, 2014 at 2:53 pm

My Challenge: Talk Sense, or become an OxyMORON (and Someone Else’s Dinner)

with 9 comments

This post was drafted  March 2014, and is posted June, 2014. Although it has some oddball illustrations — like the duckbilled platypus– and it references distraction techniques of cults (which, FYI, you’re in it), below  all that are some references you might want to bookmark re: FMS.Treasury.Gov (excerpt in 2nd box yellow with teal-green border.  This shows combined US government receipts & outlays, by source, in numbers and in a pie-chart, which is easier to remember.

Show your friends reading the morning newspapers about how broke we are. We who?


This is also 7,000 words, and has multiple formats.  [Insert Standard Copyeditor’s/Proofreaders’ Nightmare Disclaimer for anyone who’s expecting a proofread, copyedited vision of perfection.]

I am one person struggling with a free wordpress blog platform.  I compose what I’ve personally investigated and written up, including quotations and evidence from many different sources, and commentary on these, in a triple-view format; sometimes in “Text” (html) mode, others in “Visual” (the post editor).  Neither “Text” nor “Visual” mode bears ANY true resemblance to “Published” (or Preview) mode, either to paragraphing, or even to fonts (typestyles).

However, I do consistently deliver other goods that I know have helped some people not go “bonkers” (nuts) during their custody cases, get them out of trauma mode by giving some objective information (not standard predigested rhetoric) on these operations.

Anyone who doesn’t like this blog, or its format, can go find this information elsewhere [good luck with that…], or if he or she wants this information in a more polished format, hit the Donate button (on the sidebar) to help me overcome the technical (computer) issues through upgraded website, or, if that’s not within your ability range (or wish), consider signing the petition I’ve included on this post so I may do this myself, with my own resources, which the straightforward petition explains.    It can be signed anonymously, although city and state will display.

(Now would be a great time to sign or donate)

Or be patient and understand the purpose of this blog.  It’s not my attempt at an academic dissertation. I have my degrees already.    It’s about laying out some information as a NOTICE that this type of information exists.  And that people who have been badly traumatized can at least reduce their own confusion on cause-and-effect by becoming aware of this information; including WHO designed the family courts, and the programs to be run through them; and how.


 

Sometimes you just need other information to get your bearings. What’s more, it’s interesting and relevant to all of us where our taxes are being spent, and who’s running our courts.
Read the rest of this entry »

Amazing and False Assumptions about the Family Courts…

leave a comment »

This post is essentially draft, notes.  I’m just injecting, FYI, some different  talk into the tired old (while still relevant) conservations about what the courts are doing, and have done to our little ones, the next generation. ~  It’s at least as reasonable as what’s out there now. No big deep conclusions; I just wanted to point to other information, information worth giving up one’s security-blanket support groups for.

And for those who are curious, and make it through  enough paragraphs, I’ve thrown in a link telling readers (finally) my name.    WHY?  My situation is not safe (it has really become life-threatening, again, and from the attrition) and I’d like to take credit for the considerable effort put into this blog, while still alive.  And if you’re concerned, remember there’s a Donate Button Here, and a Petition there.

  Some people who have witnessed my personal situation now for over 10 years, and I truly hope that younger people, and in-bound  men and women to the family law system will recognize just who they are  dealing with, and abandon the false prophets flying around hawking their wares as if it were just one nice big family with a few communication problems any real  (well-trained) expert could straighten out.

I have paid attention to networks, and been networked, and around long enough to see “denial” mode kick in when people are presented with the uncomfortable information that they’ve been betrayed as badly by those showing empathy for their distress as by any original “abuser” who got custody.   

While I’m extremely stressed this past month, after going public (with my case) for the first time in April, I have like many been since Year 2000, to the top and back down through the justice system, the agencies, and the personalities.   I have spoken with extremely intelligent men and women and qualified, who continue hoping to extract some justice. I’m interested in extricating my LIFE and a future, with the least damages and compromise, particularly for my two (daughters), who I miss very badly these days, as well as all along, but see no way to get to, in the current situation.

 

FOOD FOR THOUGHT.


You’ve probably been hearing this more and more around the internet, as propagated by people who want us to believe it’s even relevant to the family law code in state after state.  We may want this — naturally, as human beings or parents, or others — but how does what we want relate to what the existing legal system says about this area of law? Time and again, people complain that the family courts aren’t keeping their children safe, and demand that they do, thinking (without evidence) that the courts are on the same page with the parents. since when did any family court venue say that this was its reason for existing? Does even the family code indicate this is its purpose? Now, there’s a push for The Safe Child Act by certain people who, shamelessly (and probably knowingly) call the courts by their wrong names and push the theme of “more scientific practices to recognize child abuse, ” etc.  If you’re a parent, it’s hard to resist the appeal to pathos and the assumption that better subject matter expertise would turn the family courts (often called mistakenly “custody courts,” simply an inaccurate term) into safer places for children.  Here’s a segment, catch the phrasing:

Of course protecting children’s health and safety requires more than a goal of making this the courts’ first priority.  The court cannot rely on generalized professionals who understand mental illness and psychology unless they have specialized expertise in domestic violence, child sexual abuse, substance abuse, medical diagnosis and treatment. Court professionals must be familiar with current scientific research so they know that exposure to domestic violence, child abuse and other trauma results in a lifetime of greater illnesses and injuries.  As the Saunders’ study demonstrates, courts must avoid relying on unqualified “experts” who focus on the myth that women frequently make false allegations; unscientific alienation theories or the belief that mothers’ attempts to protect children from frightening fathers are actually harmful to the children.

Yeah, well guess which group of professionals, a fairly tight-knit, self-referencing court-reform community saw the opportunity to become the next generation of experts in the courts, a long way off, and is NEVER going to give up this talk — and realized that if the mothers actually refocused their emotional energy on something different than “Abusers getting custody,” they might (like I eventually did) figure out a thing or two…See very recent post “A Different Kind of Attention Leads to Sound Judgment” for more information).



This information doesn’t take long to figure out — that the language is focused on better professionals, not operational structures. Well, the rest of this post, I’d just rather look at some different terminology; a bit about commissions that draft codes, what’s a code versus a statute, and face it — the Family Code is the new kid on the block, and you probably still have less than enough understanding of how tightly this country (and each state) is organized around the profession of law. And it doesn’t take too long to figure out that, whatever else most of us may want to believe about how vastly important we, and our children are to the world — this entire system is just not about them.


I haven’t written much lately because longstanding dealings with my own situation (<=<=yes, that is me, my petition.  Now you know….) the family court case that never closed, and its aftermath) required attention. I have been dealing right along with two or three attorneys (NOT on my side) in matters directly affecting my safety — and doing this without stable income or a full-time or even consistent job history. (You try to have a stable job history after your kids disappear from your life overnight….). A fourth one was brought in recently, apparently just for fun — and it’s become clear what the next agenda.


Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Let's Get Honest

June 7, 2014 at 10:19 pm

Accounting Literacy Matters. Cause-based Literacy Doesn’t. (Spring 2010, Ellen H Brown tangles with Walter Burien’s info, or at least tries to.)

with 3 comments

This blog has been sitting in draft since January. I cleaned it up, fleshed it out and am publishing. Meanwhile, I’ll be over at Cracking the Cult of the Constitution by Clint Richardson, and tell you why when I get back. Particularly on the topic “Corporations Sole.” (3 part series from August 2013).

Look for these two colors in a side-by-side column format to see the conversation that inspired this post.  I’ve added material to a middle section one day after publishing this post (added Sun. 5/4/2014) because I think it’s relevant.  Alternating color scheme (dark green/light-beige with red fonts) section is more about the particular institute set up AFTER the conversations of 2010.

I wouldn’t bother with this, or all the pretty colors, except that attempting to communicate CONCEPTS through the cognitive dissonance of people who mis-understand why “government” and its “social services” and “justice systems,” aren’t solving the problems, even when the word “problem-solving” is appended (like “problem-solving courts.”), is getting old.

Half the understanding is a matter of basic vocabulary, and paying attention to others’ speech. Here, I’m listening in. For followers who are just interested in “the courts,” — too bad. The courts are part of government, and if you don’t get that, I can’t help you. I did my part!! (see blog).

I find the colors, and the conversation, interesting.  Hope you do too — but the point isn’t this person, or that person.  The point is, how to make sound judgments (it shouldn’t take that long) and assessments when authority figures, or would-be authority figures/leaders, start talking.  And notice what happens after you do NOT get a straight answer.

Some months ago, I also got entangled with the “Web of Debt” conversation; not because of CAFRs, in particular, but because I also live in California and wanted a few answers I wasn’t seeing on the site. 

The strange response to a single comment on a blog (from someone I was a complete stranger to) led to my further inquiries about “Inquiring Systems, Inc.” and some of the issues below.  What I see is someone trying to sound more intelligent than he or she is (see below), and trying to seem more concerned about the disenfranchised 99% (us poor slobs) than the associations and behaviors would indicate.

Which one was the attorney, well keep reading.


 

Remember, you cannot judge a book by its cover?”
 
Well, you can’t judge a corporation by its website, or by what causes it’s in favor of.
Yesterday (well, about 1/23/2014), I got another good, fast, one-day lesson on the Environmental/Green Progressive/OneWorldOnePlanet (Our planet = Our Plans) movement by simply paying attention to a passing conversation, and then follow-up.

Read the rest of this entry »

Red Herring Alert

There's something fishy going on!

American Spring

Solidarity. Unity. People.

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...

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 360 other followers

%d bloggers like this: