This Is A Video That Should Chill The Blood Of Every Parent

[Scott Sando]

This is a video that should chill the blood of every parent and focus their minds on the fascist state that Britain, the United States, and so many other countries have already become

'These are four 'brave' police officers taking a 13-year-old child from his father four days before Christmas to take him into the 'care' of the Social Services Mafia when the boy does not want to go and simply wants to stay with his loving dad.

The four brave police officers will say they were only doing their job or 'following orders' - which is what the defendants said at the Nuremberg Trials - and they are hiding their own lack of moral fibre and basic decency behind a piece of paper they claim justifies their grotesque behaviour.

The fact that they went ahead and kidnapped a distressed 13-year-old forcibly in handcuffs makes them as responsible for this horror as the Social Services tyranny of evil that instigated it through a compliant and corrupt court system.

If these four excuses for 'men' could look their own kids and grandkids in the face this Christmas after what they did here, they are even more disgraceful and shameful than they show themselves to be in these pictures.

The system imposes its fascist will upon the population because the population en masse allow it (pathetic) and because of spineless, gutless 'uniforms' like these (pathetic). If there were not the uniforms who would do this, it could not be done.'

[GBdamo]

Very emotive, but what's the background?

The police do have a job to do. This bloke could have done anything.

[Scott Sando]

He had broken no law as it says in the vid plus the child did not want to go

[GBdamo]

He had broken no law as it says in the vid plus the child did not want to go

And you believe that social services simply knock on his door, take him to court and remove his son for no reason.

This is the problem with social services. If they don't act in time it's all 'Baby P' and if they are too hasty clowns like you post videos with little understanding, if any, of the case history.

Do you believe we should have no social services at all?

The world is not so black and white as idealists like yourself would wish.

This is a contested case, a bit of grey. Not the onset of a fascist state.

[Mr. Miyagi]

Very emotive, but what's the background?

The police do have a job to do. This bloke could have done anything.

Exactly, the post is all very well but there is no background as why a Judge made the decision to remove the child for his fathers care. There cannot be a reasoned debate on the rights and wrongs of such action without the full facts of the case being disclosed.

[Scott Sando]

I understand why you would think like that, but the state is the biggest abuser of children, and I won't stay silent.

[GBdamo]

I understand why you would think like that, but the state is the biggest abuser of children, and I won't stay silent.

Nobody's trying to silence you. You simply need to present your case in a sensible format.

You need background that points out the issue your trying to make and your own personal comment.

This way we can engage in debate and not just post random videos.

[The Ayatollah Buggeri]

This is the problem with social services. If they don't act in time it's all 'Baby P' and if they are too hasty clowns like you post videos with little understanding, if any, of the case history.

The problem is that social workers have a long and woeful track record of failing to act in Baby P-type cases (and especially when the abusive parents are from ethnic minorities), while abducting children from wholly innocent and responsible parents (usually white and indigenous British) on a regular basis. Their usual pretext for the latter is that one of the parents (usually the father) has a conviction for a minor offence, e.g. a motoring offence, many years in the past, and that this is likely to make him an abusive parent. A campaign group estimates that there are now 'several dozen' British couples that have fled to Spain in order to escape social workers' threats to take unborn children into care when they are born (details). In every case so far, the Spanish authorities have carried out extensive questioning and tests on the couples involved, usually at the request of the British authorities, and found no evidence to suggest that they're likely to abuse their children. My fear is that sooner or later the British state will try to use European extradition warrants to get them back.

About three years ago a couple in a similar situation from Northumberland fled to Norway. The case was notable, because, excepting one or two Islamic terrorists in recent years, it was the first case in which a British citizen had applied for political asylum in another country since the First World War.

A related problem is the secrecy in which the family courts operate, meaning that in effect, social workers are accountable to no-one. They are born into leftie families reading The Guardian and usually exhibit a combination of limited intellectual capacity and an inclination for authoritarianism. A little knowledge is a dangerous thing, and, once they've got their third class degrees from the University of Bolton, the training course for social workers provides that little knowledge. Then they're all set to start wrecking responsible, loving families, while letting the Karen Matthews types of this world get on with it. The basic issue is that there is a whole army of Sharon Shoesmiths out there, who hold the deep-seated ideological belief that a heterosexual, married couple who earn their own living, have made a commitment to each other and don't vote Labour are not fit to bring up children, and dedicate their working lives to putting this ideology into practice.

[GBdamo]

The problem is that social workers have a long and woeful track record of failing to act in Baby P-type cases (and especially when the abusive parents are from ethnic minorities), while abducting children from wholly innocent and responsible parents (usually white and indigenous British) on a regular basis. Their usual pretext for the latter is that one of the parents (usually the father) has a conviction for a minor offence, e.g. a motoring offence, many years in the past, and that this is likely to make him an abusive parent. A campaign group estimates that there are now 'several dozen' British couples that have fled to Spain in order to escape social workers' threats to take unborn children into care when they are born (details). In every case so far, the Spanish authorities have carried out extensive questioning and tests on the couples involved, usually at the request of the British authorities, and found no evidence to suggest that they're likely to abuse their children. My fear is that sooner or later the British state will try to use European extradition warrants to get them back.

About three years ago a couple in a similar situation from Northumberland fled to Norway. The case was notable, because, excepting one or two Islamic terrorists in recent years, it was the first case in which a British citizen had applied for political asylum in another country since the First World War.

A related problem is the secrecy in which the family courts operate, meaning that in effect, social workers are accountable to no-one. They are born into leftie families reading The Guardian and usually exhibit a combination of limited intellectual capacity and an inclination for authoritarianism. A little knowledge is a dangerous thing, and, once they've got their third class degrees from the University of Bolton, the training course for social workers provides that little knowledge. Then they're all set to start wrecking responsible, loving families, while letting the Karen Matthews types of this world get on with it. The basic issue is that there is a whole army of Sharon Shoesmiths out there, who hold the deep-seated ideological belief that a heterosexual, married couple who earn their own living, have made a commitment to each other and don't vote Labour are not fit to bring up children, and dedicate their working lives to putting this ideology into practice.

That Scott my son is how it's done.

My only bone of contention is: -

They are born into leftie families reading The Guardian and usually exhibit a combination of limited intellectual capacity and an inclination for authoritarianism. A little knowledge is a dangerous thing, and, once they've got their third class degrees from the University of Bolton, the training course for social workers provides that little knowledge.

You see my Ma was a social worker and I'd love to see you tell her that to her face.

[Guest eight]

A related problem is the secrecy in which the family courts operate, meaning that in effect, social workers are accountable to no-one. They are born into leftie families reading The Guardian and usually exhibit a combination of limited intellectual capacity and an inclination for authoritarianism. A little knowledge is a dangerous thing, and, once they've got their third class degrees from the University of Bolton, the training course for social workers provides that little knowledge. Then they're all set to start wrecking responsible, loving families, while letting the Karen Matthews types of this world get on with it. The basic issue is that there is a whole army of Sharon Shoesmiths out there, who hold the deep-seated ideological belief that a heterosexual, married couple who earn their own living, have made a commitment to each other and don't vote Labour are not fit to bring up children, and dedicate their working lives to putting this ideology into practice.

I mostly blame the media's lionisation of the McCanns for the Sharon Matthews case.

eight

[benthebuilder]

I would've thought that at 13 (should he be deemed mentally capable) the lad should be able to choose whether he stays with his old man or not.

The family courts in this country have been a joke for years and the involvement of social services only makes things worse.

Not enough background though in this case to make up my mind one way or the other.

The coppers were just doing their jobs. Not an excuse. What are they supposed to do? Threaten to resign?

No evidence of a police state here. Just a fooked up system.

[ken_ichikawa]

A related problem is the secrecy in which the family courts operate, meaning that in effect, social workers are accountable to no-one. They are born into leftie families reading The Guardian and usually exhibit a combination of limited intellectual capacity and an inclination for authoritarianism. A little knowledge is a dangerous thing, and, once they've got their third class degrees from the University of Bolton, the training course for social workers provides that little knowledge. Then they're all set to start wrecking responsible, loving families, while letting the Karen Matthews types of this world get on with it. The basic issue is that there is a whole army of Sharon Shoesmiths out there, who hold the deep-seated ideological belief that a heterosexual, married couple who earn their own living, have made a commitment to each other and don't vote Labour are not fit to bring up children, and dedicate their working lives to putting this ideology into practice.

You should read number 7 on this list

http://www.cracked.com/article_18884_the-7-most-horrifying-cost-cutting-measures-all-time.html

Everyone is thankful for Child Protective Services, which takes "let's think about the children" as an organizational slogan. But when a senator from Georgia admits that the organization tears families apart to hurriedly adopt children off for huge wads of cash, well, that's when CPS starts to look less like a government agency and more like a human trafficking ring.

We want to make it clear that none of this is aimed at the child welfare system or all the caring, wonderful people working for it. The problem seems to lie with laws like the Adoption and Safe Families Act of 1997. According to it, for each child adopted into a foster family, the responsible state receives $4,000 to $6,000, with an additional $20 million bonus if it exceeds the average number of adoptions from previous years, which turns the practice of protecting children into a nationwide pie-eating contest.

So sure, you want to be known as the state that rescues the highest number of children in America, but the policy also encourages CPS to make an increasingly liberal interpretation of the term "rescue." Consider that, a few years ago, CPS employee Pat Moore was fired for refusing to put a child in a foster home simply because everyone in the foster family had a felony conviction, and the family occasionally hired a convicted sex offender to babysit. But hey, at least none of them had been convicted of genocide yet.

The situation is so bizarre that CPS whistleblowers have even reported foster parents putting in orders for other people's children, at which point the organization will reportedly investigate the shit out of that family until they hear someone use a cuss word, and then it's hello, new parents.

If you still don't buy the mob analogy, consider this: When Vanessa Shanks' child was taken away and she fought the decision in court, CPS responded rationally by taking away children of her relatives, and after Shanks finally won in court, they took away her attorney's children. And to think they could have saved themselves so much time by simply offering Shanks "child insurance."

As I said in another post social workers are merely thugs who want more abuse and or find abuse where none exists to keep their jobs.

[ken_ichikawa]

The coppers were just doing their jobs. Not an excuse. What are they supposed to do? Threaten to resign?

Yup they should have infact as of this day I know three cops ex cops now who quit because of the horrible things they saw in the service.

It really is a case of the bad cops pushing out the good ones.

Such that the police force is self filtering to become more ruthless and filled with vile cops like the one sacked for beating up a prisoner.

[benthebuilder]

Yup they should have infact as of this day I know three cops ex cops now who quit because of the horrible things they saw in the service.

It really is a case of the bad cops pushing out the good ones.

Such that the police force is self filtering to become more ruthless and filled with vile cops like the one sacked for beating up a prisoner.

So every time an individual copper is asked to do something he doesn't agree with he should threaten to resign?

They were following a court order. Should police officers have the authority to override the rulings of the court?

Maybe we should do away with the court system altogether. Just let the police arbitrarily decide the laws the wish to enforce on any given day?

[ken_ichikawa]

So every time an individual copper is asked to do something he doesn't agree with he should threaten to resign?

They were following a court order. Should police officers have the authority to override the rulings of the court?

Nope but if they felt bad about it they would quit. Remember the principle of only following orders does not wash, it didn't work for one kind of Nazis and won't work for another either.

[ken_ichikawa]

Yes, it does. It happens in all business, not just the army and police. They are paid to do it.

Besides, as has been said before, you know nothing about this other than some out of context video. What about the PC who got stabbed in the neck the other week? Why should the police not be firm when they are told that they are going in to remove a child from a person who has been deemed not fit to parent. Should they discuss it over a brew?

In a land far far away we call this kidnapping. Much like we call taxes theft and extortion. But I forget you people like the system of a force based society.

[RichB]

so just how hard is it for 4 grown men to escort a 13 year old kid out of a house without being *****?

[benthebuilder]

Nope but if they felt bad about it they would quit. Remember the principle of only following orders does not wash, it didn't work for one kind of Nazis and won't work for another either.

Yes that clinches it. The actions of British Police force and the Nazis are so similar its frightening.

Get over yourself Ken.

[The Ayatollah Buggeri]

I mostly blame the media's lionisation of the McCanns for the Sharon Matthews case.

I find it telling that the McCanns had hired Max Clifford within a few hours of reporting their daughter's disappearance to the Portuguese police. They knew that in order to avoid being done for child neglect by the Portuguese and/or British social workers taking away their other children, they had to mount a propaganda campaign on a scale and with a focus (Kate and Gerry = innocent victims) that Goebbels would have been proud of.

It worked.

Karen Matthews, however, had neither the money nor the intelligence to play the same game successfully.

[Byron]

Nope but if they felt bad about it they would quit. Remember the principle of only following orders does not wash, it didn't work for one kind of Nazis and won't work for another either.

Ken, you are talking nonsense. Nazis were convicted of murder. Their defence of 'orders' was a non sequiter even by Third Reich standards. In fact, the Commandant of a concentration camp was executed by the nazis for ill treatment of prisoners. The extermination camps were run in secret by Himmler. Of course, the left don't like you to say this because the implication is that Hitler did not know about them.

The defence that the Police have is that they are following lawful orders. You might not like the law and are free to campaign to change it, in fact I would even join you, but to call the Police Nazis simply because you do not like them is ridiculous.

[Stay Beautiful]

This is a video that should chill the blood of every parent and focus their minds on the fascist state that Britain, the United States, and so many other countries have already become

'These are four 'brave' police officers taking a 13-year-old child from his father four days before Christmas to take him into the 'care' of the Social Services Mafia when the boy does not want to go and simply wants to stay with his loving dad.

The four brave police officers will say they were only doing their job or 'following orders' - which is what the defendants said at the Nuremberg Trials - and they are hiding their own lack of moral fibre and basic decency behind a piece of paper they claim justifies their grotesque behaviour.

The fact that they went ahead and kidnapped a distressed 13-year-old forcibly in handcuffs makes them as responsible for this horror as the Social Services tyranny of evil that instigated it through a compliant and corrupt court system.

If these four excuses for 'men' could look their own kids and grandkids in the face this Christmas after what they did here, they are even more disgraceful and shameful than they show themselves to be in these pictures.

The system imposes its fascist will upon the population because the population en masse allow it (pathetic) and because of spineless, gutless 'uniforms' like these (pathetic). If there were not the uniforms who would do this, it could not be done.'

Bizzare, whats the father done to warant this??

[Mr. Miyagi]

I find it telling that the McCanns had hired Max Clifford within a few hours of reporting their daughter's disappearance to the Portuguese police. They knew that in order to avoid being done for child neglect by the Portuguese and/or British social workers taking away their other children, they had to mount a propaganda campaign on a scale and with a focus (Kate and Gerry = innocent victims) that Goebbels would have been proud of.

It worked.

Karen Matthews, however, had neither the money nor the intelligence to play the same game successfully.

I'm not sure you can put Matthews in the same context as the McCanns, after all there is not the evidence that suggests the McCanns had anything to do with the actual abduction.

I would also suggest that the hiring of Clifford was more than just a cynical attempt by the McCanns at deflecting prosecution for child neglect. The publicity that was generated as a result of his hiring kept the abduction in the media spotlight for months, if not years.

I would agree that the McCanns should have been prosecuted for neglect.