A FIRST HAND FATHER'S RIGHTS ANALYSIS OF FRONTLINE'S FEBRUARY 6, 2003 BROADCAST OF:
"Failure to Protect (Part II): The Case Worker
LINK: Cheney analysis of "Failure to Protect (Part I): The Taking of Logan Marr"
A FIRST HAND FATHER'S RIGHTS ANALYSIS OF FRONTLINE'S FEBRUARY 6, 2003 BROADCAST OF
"Failure to Protect: The Case Worker Files."
[With a Fred Friendly Seminar]
Rachel Dretzin, Barak Goodman, and Muriel Soenens Producers, FRONTLINE
Fred Friendly Seminars:
Erin Martin Kane [firstname.lastname@example.org]
Chris Kelly [email@example.com]
Press contact for FRED FRIENDLY SEMINARS:
Michelle Prince [firstname.lastname@example.org]
By Robert Lindsay; Cheney Jr.
Author of: Suffering Patriarchy, Volumes I and II
Founder: Legends Legal Aid Society
This Thursday, the Public Broadcast System FRONTLINE aired its continuing series in Part II "The Case Worker Files" which was the continuation of Part I," The Taking of Logan Marr." Frontline again is to be congratulated for making the attempt to air such a controversial program, which effects an ever growing number of American citizens in their daily lives.
Unfortunately, this second show fell far short of its mark.. The first hour concerned an "in depth analysis" and documentary of the inner workings of Child Protective Services (CPS) in Maine, where Logan Marr was corruptly and incompetently abducted from, what conclusively turned out to be, a poor mothers home in Maine. Throughout each documentary spanning a two-week period:" The Taking of Logan Marr," "The Case Worker Files," along with the Fred Friendly Seminar of "experts," had not one (1) mention of Fatherhood which was brought to light. As far as the producers of these shows, along all the government "experts" along with Frontline are concerned; fatherhood does not exist in America. For it is a fact, that fatherhood, (the fulcrum issue which could completely eradicate many of these problems which are occurring with children) is never even considered; discussed; or taken at the value for what resource it really is in this nation. Currently, fatherhood is the greatest untapped resource that this nation has, which willfully remains ignored, and unmentionable in today's politically correct feminist environments and throughout the mainstream media. You would know nothing of this, from the Frontline presentment of their television shows which aired over a four hour period on PBS nationwide.
The second part in a series, "The Case Worker Files" gave a first hand look at what occurs within the inner machinery of CPS itself. There we find a highly professional matriarchal society, with leagues of "highly dedicated" women, with very few men within their ranks. Those men whom are within their ranks, clearly can be seen as having bought into the feminist pabulum--along with all the caseworkers, who are implementing what amounts to a socialist engineering theory scam against poor people.
In one of the most telling parts of this documentary, a young child named Matthew who has been taken away from his father, is completely inconsolable, to the point of needing hospitalization supplicates to his captors:" Let me speak to my dad, please. Let me go home," to which his benefactors tell him: "no." The child's response is all too true and correct: "You are being cruel," he tells his uncaring captors as he continues to cry and wail for his father. Soon afterwards, this "bad" child who loves his father and wants to return home, is drugged and tied to the bed by his "experts" who cannot see fatherhood as a remedy, but present a Draconian cure worse than what his father could have presented the child with himself.
We can see mindset of these "new socialist professionals," which is exemplified by several case workers presented on the show; such as one David Greeley who imparts to us the party line:" Somebody should be doing something, and we do." Yet another dully tells Shirley, a poor single mother under direct attack by Maine DHS, complains that DHS are in her life, destroying her life:" This will always hang over you," her lawyer tells her as she openly cries in pain.
My god. In a country called America these people are saying this?!??
Indeed they do, with the zealousness of an Islamic bomber, these feminized university trained "caseworkers" state with a straight face, right into the camera:" It is our position, that the child must remain away from their home."
What is the goal of all of this?
Coercion; acceptance of lies and falsehoods, to force people to expound on that which is only "politically correct" and wanted as truth (even if they are lies or completely unknown); the overt changing of "behavior" and/or "belief", and the outright dismantling of families. What we are left with are "perceptions" of government agents whom obtain not only a religious fervor from "saving the children" as well as implementing radical third wave feminism upon the country, but they also obtain huge amounts of monies, grants, foundational aid, and government payment schemes. We must note that it is what this documentary did not say, the exclusion of which is most important to this discussion, which did not get exposed to the American people, and that is, saving children and implementing Hillary Clinton's Village, is big bucks to all the "caseworkers" and their support personal of counselor's, judges, police and prisons, and the unseen aegis the represent. Yet that fact, was barely alluded to, and which should have been a mandatory part of any such documentary and/or investigation.
What is odd, that all of this which Health & Human Services is promulgating is illegal under our form of government and under our laws. No mention nor analysis was presented backing that fact, which was both a monumental part of this story and a monumental omission in the story. The idea of first, second, third, fourth and ninth amendment rights not being palpably discussed in this show, which should have been a mandatory element in the airing of the show; somehow fell completely by the wayside. Again, this Frontline show should be mocked at not what it said, but what it failed to present: fatherhood and constitutional rights. Such reporting is far, far short of any mark any reasonable citizen would have inferred or wanted from this show.
What we were presented with however; did expose the socialist / feminist mindset within these people who run CPS and other related "Family Court" personnel. "Not all parents are meant to be parents," one caseworker boldly declares. Indeed. This offhand comment would appear to fly in the face of 50,000 years of human history, which, by the way; did not need CPS nor feminism to exist. No. In fact, what we now see is that these caseworkers are hunting mostly poor people. They are on a witch hunt which is increasing caseloads, to the point of doubling them through forced manufacturing of charges and "crimes" in ten years as Frontline reports. This all to fix a "problem with no name" where an infinitesimal amount of children die in the home each year out of a populace of approximately 270million.For this, we have overturned our laws, disregarded our nations laws, and destroyed the nature and character of our peoples to uphold what can only amount to feminist theology. Ask any one of these CPS" caseworkers" if they are doing the right thing, or upholding the law--they will arrogantly scoff at you while they quote you chapter and verse from their "Codes" and/or Practice, Policy and Procedure manuals. Yet, present to them the true law, and suddenly they get mulct, and belligerent:
"The poorest man may in his cottage bid defiance to all the forces of the crown. It may be [a] frail [home]--its roof may shake--the wind may blow through it--the storm may enter--the rain may enter but the King of England cannot enter all his force dares not cross the threshold of that ruined tenement! [William Pitt, Earl of Chatham, 1708-1778, Speech in the House of Commons 1763, p 312.]"
The house of everyone is to him as his castle and fortress, as well as for his defense against injury and violence as for his repose.[Semaynes Case. 5. Report 91, Sir Edward Coke] p. 152
Start presenting them this information and you then insolently get an answer in return:" Oh, but the judge won't do that."
Perhaps. But judges are not the law. Their only function is to uphold the law--which is another discussion this show should have mandated, but failed to do. There is something very broke within our courts today, which mandates a show just on judicial corruption; yet, with this show falling so short of the mark, it is doubtful that any such investigative reporting will ever take place. Again, Frontline appears to take the chance at these hard stories, but then allows government the final word in spin control. Perhaps this author is not privy to the pragmatic dealings it takes to produce such a hard-hitting show, and perhaps Frontline had to pay this price of allowing government spin-control in which to air these presentments--again, I do not know, but only attempt here to divine a proper response to their airing.
It must be noted that we now have a system where caseworkers are oblivious to such Constitutional laws (and there are an American line of laws supporting these foundational ones which defend the sovereignty of the home and family against unwarranted government intrusion).These caseworkers depend upon the judges to do the wrong thing, and to uphold and back any silliness or socialist/feminist theory these new Family Court" experts" within aegis of Family Services can present. There is no sanctity of home and family to these people within government who were presented by Frontline in these shows." Due process of law" is nothing more to them but in getting a State Attorney (who like the judges, has been bought-off to promulgate this new feminist theology) to agree with their assumptions to file charges against parents for frivolous reasons--which is a monstrosity against any person attempting to protect their rights in the face of such a government-backed Leviathan. They sit around in small clusters verifying their own party line theology against people whom they have never met, nor never could possibly know the true depth and meaning of these peoples lives; and like Uriah Heep, they twist their hands affirming their own twisted anti-family conclusions:" Yes, the child is having problems, but that must because the mother won't "verify" his [false or unknown] charges against the boyfriend."
Frontline exposed such a parent, named "Shirley" in this documentary. Here was nothing more than a poor woman, who suddenly; upon allegations which she could not factually confirm--was thrown into the cauldron of CPS anarchy. What was most telling about this, was in a meeting with a counselor and the caseworker, where at the end, another "session" was to be planned in March--then comes the dialogue. Shirley warns: "Don't pick March fourth, we have a CPS session...don't pick March fifth, we have court...and don't pick March...."--boy! Did they capture this woman's family deep into the web of which they, and not she, designed.
And that is the key. This new "Village" wants to capture people into it. As Frontline reported in its shocking statistics, DHS could double and triple and even quadruple their caseloads and they still would not "solve" the problem" for the most part--the "problem" is not there. It only extends out of these new professionals within DHS own mindset's; their own assumptions; wants; perceptions; desires; and needs.
What Americans once used to abhor during the Communist and Vietnam revolutions of having citizens go to "Communist Re-Education Camps," has come the reality of norm in today's family court. Go to this class, see this "counselor", go to this psychologist and see this lawyer, this "expert", ad infinitum, ad nauseum. [Sidebar question: "How many H&HS 'experts' does it take to kill Logan Marr? Answer: A lot.]Yet, all these "experts" have no palpable answers or redress, yet they do have the communist re-education camps, they do have the courts, and they do have the police in which provide no palpable remedy other than to give people party line socialist theory. You can bet, that nobody in these classes are teaching what William Pitt denoted above. The laws of sovereignty, of the citizen over that of their government servant, will not be on any agenda to be discussed. You could give Hillary Clinton's Village ten times the amount of agency personnel along with ten times the budget they now have along with ten times the supporting courts and government--and they still would not solve this "problem with no name. "Ergo: their whole theology is false and is in direct contravention to our form of free American government.
The idea that a people might be free, is not on these peoples agenda. They have been bought off to Hillary Clinton's Village. And they know that party-line as if it were a religion, which it is to many of these people.
Indeed, we can see from Frontline's documentary, an insolent class of people, embedded within government and clothed under that authority, which is palpably doing harm to its own citizens. Nowhere in the show did I really find any child to be in threshold danger which would warrant removal from their family--yet, on this TV show we saw three! And we know, that there are many, many more families which these people within H&HS, CPS, and DHS which are destroying lives daily, only for social engineering purposes--and to give them a job they would not otherwise have...
But the worst was yet to come in the Fred Friendly Seminar . Here, we had a panel of "experts" which could only exude party line. Every person on that panel had an agenda which would only comport with government interests. The discussion and the theories promulgated held party line and nothing more. Again, the main component of this discussion: fatherhood--was simply not discussed. The legal and Constitutional issues, also, were not discussed. When having a seminar, or when the media attempts to disseminate information, both sides of the equation must be presented. Here, we had only one side, and it was done by presenting a mythological family, rather than hard facts case studies, which Frontline should have been done. [Indirect defiance of its lawyers and attorneys who would warn of "law suits. "There is something called the Red Lion case which gives the media the right to use the truth to air such discussions, which no court of American citizens would dare abrogate.]
Now, in deference to Frontline, I am certain, that there was incredible pressure put on them not to run the Logan Marr story. I am certain, that they had to pay the price of the devil in which to get this show on, (of which again, they are to be commended), and that was to pay the price of allowing the government "damage control" to air after the main piece of this study. Of course, if this was the case, the governments tactic's were successful, for the mass public could not truly discern who the true villain was after the show finished, and that was what was needed. The people needed closure, and instead what they got was dialogue with an agenda.
In order for this show, and other's like it, to have any meaning, Father's Rights must be included within the message and discussion, and we must have our advocates on such panels. Thereby, we are mandating that Frontline do a continuing series in their seminar, but in this one, pick the following Father's Rights advocates as part of the panel:
Dr. Steven Baskerville, email@example.com
Stephen Baskerville, PhD, Department of Political Science
Howard UniversityWashington, DC20059
Roger F. Gayrogerfgay@yahoo.com
Roger F. Gay is a professional analyst and director of the Project for Improvement of Child Support Litigation Technology. His research on child support over the past ten years brought him in touch with the national database issue. You may e-mail Roger firstname.lastname@example.org.
Diana Thompson, Second Wives Crusade,(www.secondwives.org) 22365ElToro Rd., #115, Lake Forest, California 92630, 1-800-978-3237
Bruce Eden, Fathers Right Advocate, New Jersey; email@example.com
Roger F. Doyle, firstname.lastname@example.orgMensDefense Assoc. 17854 Lyons St. Forest Lake, MN 55025-8107
Mark Charalambous, Spokesman; CPF- The Fatherhood Coalition, email@example.com
Dr. Sanford Braver, Author, Divorced Dads, Shattering the Myths,
If Frontline endeavors to do a "real" show, and wants to "really" educate the public--have people such as this along with government experts on the next "panel of experts" roundtable discussion. Indeed; if the creators of this show have not recognized, there is real expertise here (in the list I submit), far above the mundane "company line" of "experts" which were proffered for this show.
Again, Frontline's "experts" which were presented at the end of this series, were nothing more than company men: those within the inner workings of the problem itself. I find it odd, that Frontline would only go to those, whom create the problem, then back and support the problem--with no opposing viewpoints. Indeed; the problem itself has been created, and being managed and sustained by those same persons. There is a term called Iatrogenic, which simply means that a disease or sickness is Doctor induced. Health and Human Services, along with all its "experts" of congressmen and counselor's, judges; psychologists; prisons; police, sheriffs; caseworkers; media personalities and whatnot: "are the problem." As we could see, it is they, and not the parents whom are causing this problem. The current problem of fatherlessness, of CPS and H&HS against its own people, is in fact, Iatrogenic. Again, how many experts does it take to kill Logan Marr?
Now, I am chagrined to note; that I myself even presaged these facts in my first analysis which was presented to you last week, where I clearly and boldly adumbrated:
"However; I can guarantee what you will not see in the next show: and that will be that you will not see any Father's Rights advocates within DHS. You will see no constitutionalists. You will see no Patriarch's nor advocates of constitutional law nor the rights of the people being supreme over that of government. You will never see any of these people there, nor in any PBS discussion. What you will see is government inspired and hired lackeys. You will see party line. You will see third-party affected "dedication" and "care." You will see feminist theology. And you will see Hillary Clinton's "Village." But again, you won't see fathers nor anything remotely supporting them."
I find it remarkable that I said this, nearly a week before the airing of the second show. And it is in that final analysis where this whole Frontline documentary failed. Frontline took the attempt to broaching a difficult story which is fifty years overdue, and then allowed it to be painted over by government lackey's and spin control. If anything, this show let many people down--as it gave them a glimpse of the problem, but then allowed in the final analysis, only government assessment, government spin control, government analysis and explanation.
Logan Marr deserved better than that.
So do we.
# # #
Robert Lindsay; Cheney Jr.