Wake Up Watchmen - Our Children Are Being Stolen By The State

Dirty Deeds In Secret Courts

.

The word gagged says it all.


" That no person shall publish to the public at large or any section of the public any material  XXX… and that no further information with be published whether in print or electronically concerning  XXX... "


UK Courts are now empowered to gag the press, media and internet UK wide from reporting family court cases. That they can initiate this action from within a court that is already barred to the public and where press representatives are threatened with court action if they dare publish, is the clear start of a police state.

The greatest lie is that the gagging is to protect the interests of the child.


In fact the interests of the child comes a very poor second to the need for a cluster of firms and individuals to earn fees from the court case and ‘protection’ of the child.


A typical case will involve a barrister on circa £300 per hour, a solicitor £150 per hour, psychiatric or psychological experts at circa £2,000 per report plus court attendance time, clerks £70 per hour, Social Services staff, say 3 at £50 per hour, plus local Authority legal team £100 per hour, plus travel and accommodation. A recent case overseas included airfares and weeks of ‘child care’.The Judge is of course an additional cost.

Taxpayer’s money is clearly readily available when the State decides to take our children. Altogether the Family Court and Child Protection system is a £20 billion industry feeding off vulnerable children and families.


It is not uncommon for parents to bankrupt themselves trying to stop the child-stealing state taking their children.


But under the guise that the child cannot be mentioned and the court secret, the parent is victimised from day one.


Hearsay evidence is brought into court by the public sector and presented as fact.


The character of the mother or father is undermined by psychiatric reports where the ‘expert’ has never met them or the child.


In one recent case the authority used an clinical psychologist who was a member of a South American New Age Cult that believed in light people and huge ancient beings. If that was the parent, they would be branded mad and sectioned. But of course none of this madness can be reported.

Of serious interest to the public, is that cases follow a ‘template’ of actions by Social Services, Police and the Courts, to ensure that parents reporting child abuse are gagged, and / or branded as mentally ill, so allowing the child to be taken.


Once taken, the parents are restricted to visits of one hour twice per week - usually under CCTVs and with ‘experts’ watching their every move. 

Surprisingly for a police force that was spectacularly unable to properly investigate the mother’s original and ongoing concerns that her child was being abused, an English constabulary was able to send two plain clothes policemen to arrest a mother as she left court recently.  Charged and bailed, she now faces yet more court appearances to defend her action in protecting her child.  Justice appears to be on its head, as the real policy is clearly to victimise the victim. Satanic law in fact. The case is gagged of course.

Although many people will still not want to believe that Social Services are acting above and outside the law to remove children from perfectly good parents, the UK Column is receiving ever more information from whistleblowers within Social Services who are very concerned at what is happening. For those readers thinking ... ”this couldn’t happen to us”... the evidence shows it can and does, no matter the social class, colour, wealth or geographic location.


All children are vulnerable, and will be increasingly so, if the government succeeds in creating ‘UN based Rights for the Child’, which will in fact make a child the property of the state.Orwellian,but reality in the form of UN Non Governmental Organisation policy cells now feeding directly into the Westminster political machine.


Witness also Barnado’s Chief Executive Martin Narey, recently calling for thousands more children to be taken into care at an earlier age. Yet doesn’t Barnardo’s make money from children and court cases?

Policing on the Isle of Wight is led by Chief Superintendent David Thomas who states...”I will always seek to develop relationships with our partner agencies, including the Isle of Wight Council and the NHS Isle of Wight to work on ways of preventing crime at every opportunity.” The words sound good until we analyse them. How close a partnership should the police have with the Council and NHS? Is Mr Thomas’s partnership so strong that these two organisations are above police scrutiny? And when did the NHS start to be responsible for preventing crime? We might ask a further question. Is the partnership between the Isle of Wight police, the local Council and the NHS so strong that it forms a conspiracy to prevent full and proper investigation into paedophiles?

The template for SS child-snatching in child abuse cases includes the following steps:

• Blocking evidence of paedophile abuse brought by adults and children by delays, ‘lost’ documents, obfuscation and stonewalling.
• Countering allegations of abuse by the spreading of false rumours about the victim, family and mothers in particular. This may be done verbally, in written documentation and / or by ‘gossip’.
• Using the psychiatric profession to undermine those reporting crimes by labelling them with false and inaccurate mental illnesses. Psychiatric reports are often written by psychiatrists who have never met the subject of their report.
• Coaching child victims in closed door interviews that their abuse claims are imaginary. A number of psychologists and psychotherapists seem to specialise in providing these ‘services’. Some produce damning expert psychological reports on parents and children they have never met in person.
• Psychological harrassment of the victim family by threats of removing the abused child, and or the forcible placement of the child with the person originally identified as an abuser.
• Threats to isolate the family - “don’t speak to anyone about the case, don’t speak to the press or media.” Often this threat is reinforced by suggesting that speaking out will automatically ensure the child is taken from their mother or father, or both.
• Collusion between the Police, Social Services, NHS and legal teams so that the victim family is held on the outside of a ‘decision making ring’, over which they have no influence or right of appeal.
• Deliberate isolation of the child from parents to family break bonds and relationships. The child is  told that there is no contact with the parent(s) because they “don’t love you anymore.” In fact the parent is blocked by Social Services from seeing the child.
• Repeated Court hearings which drain the family physically, emotionally and financially.
• Ultimately, the child victim is removed from the parent(s) via the Family Courts within a secret hearing which shuts out the public and the wider press and media.

In the tragic case of Lianne Smith, the trauma of being hounded out of UK and hunted through Spain by Social Services for her children became too much for her. Rather than lose them, and knowing the inside workings of the SS care system from her own professional experience, she decided to end their lives. Lianne’s actions are unthinkable, but horrified as we may be, the fundamental question that must be answered is what was really going on around her to cause this reaction?

For Linda Lewis of South Wales, her daughter was taken by Neath Port Talbot Social Services 12 years ago, whilst her child was in the USA for a vital medical diagnosis. No single document was in place to lawfully support the actions of the SS, as clearly proven in Cardiff Court last year.  Bonnie was effectively kidnapped by the state. She has never been reunited with her mother, and although now adult,remains imprisoned behind a wall of SS ‘carers’.

The list goes on.


Maureen Spalek of Liverpool, as recently reported by Christopher Booker in the Telegraph, had her children taken based on false psychiatric reports and false ‘evidence’ against her. Still fighting for their return and justice, Maureen has been the victim of constant harassment by Merseyside and Cheshire Police.Their latest tactics included arresting her for sending a birthday card to her son, and arresting her following an alleged complaint for sending a ‘text’. Held in custody for 4 hours, she was then released without charge.


Christopher Booker from the Telegraph is awake.The wider public needs to be.

Corinne Gouget lost her two girls after seeking to protect them from abuse.Branded mentally ill, she fought back to win custody of them.This decision was subsequently overturned to give custody of the girls to the abuser. Similar to the Gib case, Corinne lost her girls following cross border collaboration by the SS - the French handing the girls over to the English SS.

Sophie, Melissa, Sabina, Kevin, Allan, Hollie and Jane are just others from many more.  Since ‘Child-snatching by the State’ finally made mainstream press, the cases pour in. Too many to help individually, but all showing the same template of cruelty, lies and lawbreaking by cabals inside Social Services, Police and the Courts. Not true? Then why the need for secret courts, press and media injunctions and threats of imprisonment for reporting. The big lie is ....”to protect the child”. In reality, wickedness stalks the secret family courts - it is a fascist state system designed to destroy parents, children and family life.

We should remember the words of CS Lewis ...

The greatest evil is not done in those sordid dens of evil that Dickens loved to paint ... but is conceived and ordered (moved, seconded, carried, and minuted) in clear, carpeted, warmed, well-lighted offices, by quiet men with white collars and cut fingernails and smooth-shaven cheeks who do not need to raise their voices.

Roelie Post, author of “Romania - For Export Only” has been warning for years of plans to allow EU wide trafficking’ of children for adoption.


The State steals your children in Newcastle, and they are adopted by a couple in Sicily or further afield.


The child is to be the property of the supranational state.


When will they take yours?


Demand that parents’ rights remain above those of the State.
.
By Brian Gerrish of the UK Column www.ukcolumn.org