Editor’s note: It is ironic but grossly exposes hypocrisy of so-called International Community which is deliberately ignoring state terrorism on Muslims in Chechnya by Russia, in Palestine by Israel, in Kashmir by India and in Afghanistan/Iraq by United States of America. It is time that Muslims redefine their relationship with West which should be based on equal terms and identify Munafiqun (hypocrites) to eliminate them.

Kavkaz Monitoring Center Report

According to local sources in Chechnya, gang members of pro-Kremilin group grabbed two civilians on November 21-22.

A resident of mountainous Shatoi district of Chechnya was accused with assisting of food to a mobile group of Chechen Mujahideen in nearby Urus Martan district, since September 2009. Apostates grabbed him and claimed that the hostage confessed that he was planning to join Chechen Mujahideen.

The second hostage is 48 year old, a resident of Jokhar (former Grozny). The Kadyrovites accused that he was a member of Arbi Barayev’s unit and left from his group shortly before the end of first Russian-Chechen war.

On the other hand, Russian occupiers introduced the “counter-terrorism operation regime” (CTO) in Achkoi-Martan district of Chechnya since midnight of 23-24 November. Let’s remember that Urus-Martan district was imposed to the counter-terrorism operation in the beginning of this November.

Read more

Editor’s note: It is ironic but grossly exposes hypocrisy of so-called International Community which is deliberately ignoring state terrorism on Muslims in Chechnya by Russia, in Palestine by Israel, in Kashmir by India and in Afghanistan/Iraq by United States of America. It is time that Muslims redefine their relationship with West which should be based on equal terms and identify Munafiqun (hypocrites) to eliminate them.

Kavkaz Monitoring Center Report

According to local sources in Chechnya, gang members of pro-Kremilin group grabbed two civilians on November 21-22.

A resident of mountainous Shatoi district of Chechnya was accused with assisting of food to a mobile group of Chechen Mujahideen in nearby Urus Martan district, since September 2009. Apostates grabbed him and claimed that the hostage confessed that he was planning to join Chechen Mujahideen.

The second hostage is 48 year old, a resident of Jokhar (former Grozny). The Kadyrovites accused that he was a member of Arbi Barayev’s unit and left from his group shortly before the end of first Russian-Chechen war.

On the other hand, Russian occupiers introduced the “counter-terrorism operation regime” (CTO) in Achkoi-Martan district of Chechnya since midnight of 23-24 November. Let’s remember that Urus-Martan district was imposed to the counter-terrorism operation in the beginning of this November.

Read more

I purchased Favorite, by Karen McQuestion, because I enjoyed her previous book, Lies I Told My Children.

Angel Favorite’s mother disappeared five years ago. Today, Angel is the victim of a brutal attack. Are the two events linked?

4 Stars

Plot/Storyline: 3 Stars
Firmly entrenched in the Young Adult genre, this book does not deviate from that style, catering mainly to the very young teen. However, it is an interesting story that held my attention throughout, if for no other reason than to learn the outcome.

As an adult, I found the plot to be simplistic without much meat to it. We are given some background, but the information is sparse and delivered without much emotion.

There is also not enough background or justification for the villains’ actions. There is perhaps a thin thread signifying insanity, but to me, just implying someone is crazy is not good enough in fiction.

I found it extremely odd that everyone made such a big deal about leaving a sixteen and seventeen year old home alone for a few days. Sure, Angel had been attacked, but the culprit was behind bars. For the most part, though, that wasn’t even brought up. The general concern was simply that two ‘minors’ were left home alone.

The initial attack on Angel was very well presented. The suspense was excellent, and the details were just right, not overwhelming or confusing.

The entire ‘feel-good’ ending left me pretty much cold. There wasn’t enough emotional investment in the story to really enjoy it.

Character Development: 3 Stars

Angel Favorite much too often appears younger than her sixteen years. Her initial animosity toward her attacker’s mother was somewhat understandable; however, it continued far too long with no real provocation, giving Angel an even more immature attitude. Oddly, no adult ever had a conversation with her to explain that it was not necessarily the mother’s fault.

Angel’s brother does come across with a maturity commisserate with his age. The father seemed oblivious to everything but himself and his music which made me wonder what Angel’s mother was like and how she managed to stay with such a self-centered person.

Writing Style: 5 Stars

The writing style was pretty good for a Young Adult novel. I assumed the author was aiming at the thirteen to sixteen year old crowd, and, if so, the sentence structure and vocabulary used were right on target. The descriptions were pretty sparse, but they did get the job done. Excellent voices were heard in the dialogue.

Editing/Formatting: 5 Stars

Both were of professional quality.

Rating: PG-13 due to Violence.

————————————–

I have to admit that while I enjoy some Young Adult novels, I do have to review them from an adult perspective, which may cause some ‘downgrading’ when it comes to rating. However, I also feel that a teenaged discerning reader might feel the same way about these issues that I do. Teenagers are simply more mature in this day and age. Books have to compete with movies and television. I’m not saying that books need to be more violent or graphic, simply that it could take a little more maturity in the storyline these days to hold a teen’s attention.

———————————–

Here are some comments from the author, Karen McQuestion:

I’m a freelance writer who lives in Hartland, Wisconsin. I’ve been writing since grade school but didn’t start writing novels until the youngest of my three children was in preschool. Favorite was an early project that was completely rewritten and revised countless times. The title changed along with the manuscript from Angel Favorite to Finding Angie and Saving Angie. In the original version, the main character, Angie Favorite, was an adult woman and single mother to Jason. At that time, I had an agent who submitted it on my behalf, but although it made it through a few publishing hoops, no one offered to publish it. Even after I broke ties with that agent (he left the business) I still couldn’t get this story out of my head.

Periodically I’d work on it, making myself crazy by taking things out and adding things in. Eventually I had a eureka moment—the flaw in the story was the main character’s age. Once I changed the plot so that Angie was a teenager, the whole thing came together. Of course, that required a complete rewrite. Her son became her brother, her ex-husband became her father etc. Angie’s missing parent was now her mother, not her father, and the ending changed as well. The new version seemed just right to me and the title, Favorite, obvious for its double meaning both as a last name and also for the definition of the word.

When I learned authors could self-publish on Kindle that seemed the surest avenue to getting a book out in the world. Favorite is actually my fourth title to be released on Kindle. I’d been gratified by the sales and feedback I’ve gotten for my previous three books. I hope readers enjoy Favorite.

Favorite, by Karen McQuestion

SAN LUIS, Southern Colorado: A string of calf mutilations earlier this month have left a local rancher and law enforcement scratching their heads. Rancher Manuel Sanchez has had four calves mutilated over a three-week span in a pasture he leases near Los Vallejos, just southeast of here, with the most recent victim coming on Nov. 16. In each case, Sanchez found his calves with skin peeled back and organs cleaned out from the rib cage.

He found no signs of human attackers such as ATV tracks or footprints in the pasture that’s guarded by two locked gates. Nor did he find any evidence of animal predators such as a coyote or a mountain lion. There were no blood pools near the animals, or drag marks on the ground. “There’s nothing really to go by,” said Sanchez, who’s ranched for nearly 50 years. “I can’t figure it out.”

Sgt. James Chavez, who serves as the public information officer for the Costilla County Sheriff’s Office, said a deputy and an undersheriff went to the pasture to investigate one of the killings. Chavez said the investigation revealed no indications of a predator attack and the lack of blood at the site made it highly unlikely that a person butchered it. ”I’ve butchered a cow before and I know what kind of a mess it leaves,” he said.

Both Sanchez and Chavez think there have been other mutilations in the area that have gone unreported because of people’s unwillingness to talk about something so mysterious. Chavez, who’s worked in Costilla County for five years, also investigated mutilations when he was a sheriff’s deputy in Rio Grande County. Neither of the men believe aliens were responsible for the attack. But in the San Luis Valley, where a mutilated horse maintains celebrity status four decades after its death and a UFO watchtower graces the roadside near Hooper, some may look upward for an explanation of the incidents.

The day after Sanchez found his last calf mutilated, Chuck Zukowski came down from Colorado Springs to investigate. Zukowski, who investigated three cattle mutilations in Huerfano and Las Animas counties in March, hopes to establish a link between cattle mutilations and the existence of UFOs. But Zukowski’s report, which is posted on his Web site, ufonut.com, does not reach that conclusion. It does note, however, that the mutilation of Sanchez’s last calf was similar to one found on Tom Miller’s ranch near Trinidad. The only differences were that Sanchez’s calf was missing part of its tongue, while the Miller calf was missing both its ears.

Zukowski hopes to find a cow mutilation with more of the animal intact so he can send it to veterinary labs at Colorado State University for a necropsy. ”We’re trying as much as we can to find a pattern,” he said in a phone interview with the newspaper, The Chieftain. In the meantime, Sanchez has sold off his 32 remaining calves out of fear more would get mutilated. He has yet to decide how he’ll manage the remaining 40 animals in his herd. ”It’s a big loss for a small rancher,” he said.

Original copy:

By MATT HILDNER
THE PUEBLO CHIEFTAIN

Photo prise en Octobre 2009.

Le témoin a pointé son appareil photo vers un  paysage qu’il trouvait magnifique  sur la route de Bahia, Brésil. Il a essayé de prendre la photo à trois reprises, mais l’appareil était  hors tension.

Lettre de Eli Santos

Ana Luisa: “Un ami qui habite ici, au Brésil (en Januária, MG), est allé à la baie au début d’ Octobre de cette année.   Il a voyagé en voiture.   Sur la route, il a vu un paysage qu’il a aimé et s’est arrêté. Il a essayé de prendre la photo à trois reprises, mais ne pouvait pas, l’appareil numérique était  hors tension, puis il a continué sa route. Arrivant à son domicile, a noté qu’il capturé une image dans laquelle un objet est jaune, est ce une tache sur la lentille?, Me demande mon ami. Il m’a montré des photos de sa promenade (la mer, la maison et amis), mais nulle part cet objet  qui ressemble à un OVNI, seulement dans le paysage. J’insiste sur le fait n’est pas un montage, comme certains l’affirment sur  Internet.

Commentaire .- À notre avis, cette photo est  authentique. Elle a les caractéristiques d’un flou de bougé. Cela peut être un OVNI, jusqu’à ce  que sa nature soit déterminée en analysant le cliché d’origine.”

Source : http://analuisacid.com/

Would you all agree with me that war is an ugly, but sometimes necessary thing? No SANE person ever wants to go to war. But when diplomacy fails and our national well being, safety, and security are at stake military action is sometimes necessary. When military action can no longer be avoided, for it to be truly effective it must be conducted violently and with overwhelming force to quickly defeat the enemy and make them KNOW that further resistance is futile. Contrary to what many opponents of any war believe, fewer people on both sides die if you hold to these principals. When you try to make war “nice,” as our spineless yellow bellied politicians have done, it turns into a slow war of attrition, a war of a thousand cuts. The enemy that threatened you is never defeated and will ALWAYS be a threat until they are defeated. They gain strength day after day and kill more and more of your people a few at a time.

With regard to Iraq, Afghanistan, or any other conflict in which our military is employed, just about every conservative I know, be they politician, talk show host, fellow soldier, sailor, Marine or airman, have universally held the opinion “let us win, or bring us home.” That includes me. When we went into Iraq and Afghanistan, there was a genuine military purpose and legitimate national security goal. Once the initial military victories on the ground had faded into history, the politicians got involved and began to tear down the success of our military. Especially those liberal politicians who didn’t want us to go to Iraq or Afghanistan in the first place, but who would not speak out because the POLLS said speaking out against the actions wasn’t popular. Cowards.

As each day passes, the liberals withdraw more and more support from our military men and women who are on the front lines risking and sacrificing their lives for America. The withhold money, new weapons, and reinforcements. They attack and belittle the military in the press. The two most notable examples of this are senator Harry Reid of Nevada who said the war in Iraq was lost before the surge ever began, and congressman Jack Murtha (spit) of Pennsylvania who with no proof or evidence came out publicly and loudly to proclaim that U.S. Marines in Haditha, Iraq were murderers and baby killers. Of course they were proven innocent, but Murtha (spit) couldn’t and still hasn’t found a microphone to say he was wrong, or that he is sorry for what he said. He calls himself a former Marine, but I assure you any REAL Marine would rather disembowel himself than shake this traitors hand.

Now we have the Obama administration about to prosecute three Navy SEALs for capturing a terrorist on the field of battle ALIVE. Keep in mind that usually SEALs don’t CAPTURE anyone. They kill them. Why are they being prosecuted? Because the terrorist, the mastermind of the abduction, torture, execution, and burning of four Blackwater agents whose bodies were then hung from a bridge, this scumbag got a bloody lip. I’m sure he wasn’t read his Miranda rights either. He should have died of acute lead poisoning. Navy “leadership,” in politically correct lock step with Obama and the liberals, tried to give these SEALs non-judicial punishment which would still effectively end their careers. Seeing the absurdity of this they exercised their option and demanded a trial by Courts Martial. God bless them.

Yesterday I heard several people who had been ardent supporters of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan say it was time to bring our troops home. Radio hosts Roger Hedgecock and Glenn Beck were two of the more notable. When our Commander-in-Chief (in this case the campaigner-in-chief) and the rest of our national command structure no longer support our military in a time of war, when they will throw our own soldiers under the bus, when they WILL NOT ALLOW OUR MILITARY TO WIN, it is time to bring them home. The lives of a million of those dirt bag, swine excrement, satanic terrorists is not worth the life of even one single American.

Bring them home. Now.
+

Navy SEALs Face Assault Charges for Capturing Most-Wanted Terrorist

Wednesday, November 25, 2009
By Rowan Scarborough

Navy SEALs have secretly captured one of the most wanted terrorists in Iraq — the alleged mastermind of the murder and mutilation of four Blackwater USA security guards in Fallujah in 2004. And three of the SEALs who captured him are now facing criminal charges, sources told FoxNews.com.

The three, all members of the Navy’s elite commando unit, have refused non-judicial punishment — called an admiral’s mast — and have requested a trial by court-martial.

Ahmed Hashim Abed, whom the military code-named “Objective Amber,” told investigators he was punched by his captors — and he had the bloody lip to prove it.

Now, instead of being lauded for bringing to justice a high-value target, three of the SEAL commandos, all enlisted, face assault charges and have retained lawyers.

Matthew McCabe, a Special Operations Petty Officer Second Class (SO-2), is facing three charges: dereliction of performance of duty for willfully failing to safeguard a detainee, making a false official statement, and assault.

Petty Officer Jonathan Keefe, SO-2, is facing charges of dereliction of performance of duty and making a false official statement.

Petty Officer Julio Huertas, SO-1, faces those same charges and an additional charge of impediment of an investigation.

Neal Puckett, an attorney representing McCabe, told Fox News the SEALs are being charged for allegedly giving the detainee a “punch in the gut.”

“I don’t know how they’re going to bring this detainee to the United States and give us our constitutional right to confrontation in the courtroom,” Puckett said. “But again, we have terrorists getting their constitutional rights in New York City, but I suspect that they’re going to deny these SEALs their right to confrontation in a military courtroom in Virginia.”

The three SEALs will be arraigned separately on Dec. 7. Another three SEALs — two officers and an enlisted sailor — have been identified by investigators as witnesses but have not been charged.

FoxNews.com obtained the official handwritten statement from one of the three witnesses given on Sept. 3, hours after Abed was captured and still being held at the SEAL base at Camp Baharia. He was later taken to a cell in the U.S.-operated Green Zone in Baghdad.

The SEAL told investigators he had showered after the mission, gone to the kitchen and then decided to look in on the detainee.

“I gave the detainee a glance over and then left,” the SEAL wrote. “I did not notice anything wrong with the detainee and he appeared in good health.”

Lt. Col. Holly Silkman, spokeswoman for the special operations component of U.S. Central Command, confirmed Tuesday to FoxNews.com that three SEALs have been charged in connection with the capture of a detainee. She said their court martial is scheduled for January.

United States Central Command declined to discuss the detainee, but a legal source told FoxNews.com that the detainee was turned over to Iraqi authorities, to whom he made the abuse complaints. He was then returned to American custody. The SEAL leader reported the charge up the chain of command, and an investigation ensued.

The source said intelligence briefings provided to the SEALs stated that “Objective Amber” planned the 2004 Fallujah ambush, and “they had been tracking this guy for some time.”

The Fallujah atrocity came to symbolize the brutality of the enemy in Iraq and the degree to which a homegrown insurgency was extending its grip over Iraq.

The four Blackwater agents were transporting supplies for a catering company when they were ambushed and killed by gunfire and grenades. Insurgents burned the bodies and dragged them through the city. They hanged two of the bodies on a bridge over the Euphrates River for the world press to photograph.

Intelligence sources identified Abed as the ringleader, but he had evaded capture until September.

The military is sensitive to charges of detainee abuse highlighted in the Abu Ghraib prison scandal. The Navy charged four SEALs with abuse in 2004 in connection with detainee treatment.

View this on Buggs Blog

Here’s a short video with Dan Aykroyd giving his reasons for believing that EBE’s are here and watching us right now. Upcoming in my next posting, the single greatest video ever recorded of a UFO.

On Tuesday, more developments in the Shaniya Davis murder case.

Antoinette Davis, Shaniya’s mother, who has been charged with human trafficking and child abuse, was transferred for her own safety.

According to The Fayettville Observer, Davis was transferred from the Cumberland County Detention Center to the North Carolina Correctional Center for Women in Raleigh, North Carolina.

According to WRAL.com, special attention had to be paid to Davis. She “was being held in a safe-keeping cell away from the general prison population,” according to state Department of Correction spokesman Keith Acree.

Debbie Tanna, a spokeswoman for the Cumberland County Sheriff’s Office, stated that Davis “is pregnant, so special precautions had to be taken.”

Also on Tuesday, Shaniya Davis’s father, Bradley Lockhart, appeared in the studio with host Meredith Vieira on NBC’s “Today” show to talk about the life and death of his daughter.

Lockhart spoke of the last time he saw his little girl before he left for an out-of-state business trip. He stated that she climbed up into his truck to kiss him goodbye and that they would see each other upon his return. Unfortunately, Lockhart would never see his daughter again.

Vieira pressed the issue as to whether or not Lockhart should have seen the signs that sending his daughter to her mother, Antoinette Davis, was the wrong move. “I don’t think I really missed any (signs). Of course there’s always speculation. There’s always things you could look at and say, well maybe, maybe not,” Lockhart said.

A pensive looking Lockhart added, “We obviously make decisions in life that sometimes have repercussions or adverse situations that drift from our decision. We just have to continue to believe in God and hope that our decisions are the correct ones.”

-Read Antoinette Davis’s arrest warrant.

-Listen to Antoinette Davis’s 911 call.

-Read Mario McNeill’s arrest warrant.

-Watch Brad Lockhart on NBC Today.

NBC TODAY Show: Shaniya’s Dad: ‘She Touched a Lot of People’

Traduction: “Un   MIG21 Lancer Roumain volait à 6500 mètres à 800 km/h quand il a été frappé par 4 objets volants non identifiés. En raison de la vitesse de l’avion, la caméra à bord de l’avion ne montre que 4 des objets pas très distincts… Les  services de renseignements Roumains ont été priés de fournir une aide technique …. “

analuisacid – Témoignage de Víctor González (traduction) – “Lundi 9 novembre, j’ai observé une luminosité très rare parmi les nuages,   plus tard j’ai perçu que la lumière émanait d’un objet qui se déplaçait lentement dans le ciel. C’est passé au dessus quand je suis allé à pied à l’école de mon fils (pour le récupérer).  Puis j’ai emmené le garçon chez ma belle-mère, comme chaque jour, et suis suis retourné à l’atelier. Il s’était déjà écoulé 30 minutes et l’objet était toujours en vue. Puis j’ai avisé mon père de sorte qu’il sorte le  télescope. C’est ainsi que je l’a enregistré, vers 14:30 heures, en ajustant au télescope une caméra de vidéo de zoom optique 40x. Cela a duré longtemps, de 2 à 3 heures de l’après midi, jusqu’à ce qu’il pointe du nord-est au sud-est. “

As I have posted before…..many individuals, county offices, law enforcement and Shaniya’s school LEFT HER DOWN! Let alone “MOMMY DEAREST”, family members, irresponsible and ignorant friends of her mother’s and the list goes on. In my book, “they weren’t there for her and her well-being”; bottom-line.

Monday, November 23rd North Carolina has announced that “a state team of experts will examine any contact that the Cumberland County Department of Social Services had with the family.

Shaniya was SOLD aa a sex slave AT THE AGE OF FIVE YEARS OLD! by her poor excuse of a mother because SHE HAD A DRUG PROBLEM ALLEGEDLY OWED MONEY FOR SAME. She sold/turned her baby girl over for an alleged DRUG debt that she owed to Mario Andrette McNeill who has been charged with first-degree murder, first-degree rape of a child and first-degree kidnapping. This poor excuse of a man DATED Shaniya’s aunt! Mommy Dearest has been charged with human trafficking, felony child abuse-prostitution, filing a false police report and obstructing a police investigation. Arrest warrants state that “DAVIS DID KNOWINGLY PROVIDE SHANIYA WITH THE INTENT THAT SHE BE HELD IN SEXUAL SERVITUDE” (A SEX SLAVE…..A FIVE YEAR OLD CHILD!) and “DID PERMIT AN ACT OF PROSTITUTION WITH SHANIYA” while in HER CUSTODY. If this woman escapes the death penalty many will personally not understand as Shaniya was in her custody and she knowingly knew what would happen to her child!

There are so many red flags, warning signs, bells and whistles in this sickening, senseless loss of Shaniya from so many respects. How in the hell did this happen?; “How could things have gotten to this?” Others MUST BE HELD accountable for their failures as many failed Shaniya.

1. DSS-I don’t care that she was able to maintain custody of her 7-year old child. Didn’t neighbors suspect anything “off” at this home? Didn’t the property manager sense that something was “fishy” at this home? Why didn’t anyone report to DSS and law enforcement of their “gut feelings”?
2. Shaniya’s school – her mother withdrew her from school and was any attempt to contact her father and/or her aunt as to her absences? I am a mother and if a child does not show up for school one day a phone call is made. For God’s sake………..Antoinette took Shaniya out of school if not immediately after her father handed her over to this MONSTER! Why didn’t the school notify her father/aunt, notify law enforcement, DSS and ultimately pay a physical visit to the home!? In my book…….this was irresponsible.
3. Neighbors and the property manager noticed heavier traffic to and from the home that Shaniya was living. What’s up with that? NOT THE NORM, WOULDN’T YOU THINK?

As for McNeill and Davis I hope that justice is served and that NC pushes for the death penalty of McNeill (for God’s sake with his rap sheet he shouldn’t even had been out on the damn street). As for Mommy Dearest………..she is just as guilty for her daughter’s murder as she was in her custody and she traded her as a SEX SLAVE for a drug debt! Mother’s like this…………..who needs enemies. An innocent child at the hands of this monster. I know that murder charges have not been filed but damn she deserves it.

And, I pray that all of the agencies, family members and Dad/Aunt are investigated as to their responsibilities as THEY ALL ULTIMATELY LEFT SHANIYA DOWN. They left her to fend for herself with NO DEFENSE. Shaniya didn’t have a chance in hell once Daddy turned her over to Mommy Dearest.

As for “DSS being overburdened and underfunded” shouldn’t ease their distress – they missed the boat BIG TIME ON THIS INNOCENT, SENSELESS DEATH of this sweet, innocent child.

It’s really a shame that an innocent life of a precious 5 year-old child had to be the WAKE UP CALL to all, including the public. SAD!

The statistics are alarming with homicides and more of innocent children. I personally have a hard time digesting that DSS agencies received 127,192 reports of child abuse and neglect statewide (NC), and workers were ONLY ABLE TO SUBSTANTIATE ABUSE OR NEGLECT IN LESS THAN 10% OF THE REPORTS. This in itself doesn’t smell or feel right to many of us.

I encourage NC’s Child Fatality Task Force in their endeavor from the team of experts. We plead with you to turn over every stone from EVERY angle.

I try to keep an open-mind on such things…I have witnessed UFOs myself. My question then becomes

WHAT ARE THEY?

Are they aliens? Government? Military? A combination?

I don’t know, but I will tell you this much…they ain’t good.

I know there is a school of thought that says the aliens are good, they are protecting us, etc etc…

I am sorry, but it seems to me that abduction is a pretty evil, scary thing. Especially when you don’t know who your bloody captors are.

There are a few possibilities here.

Military

Maybe it is the military, swooping up people and testing new and exciting aircraft. If they are, indeed, doing this…well, it ain’t good. They are doing things covertly, against their own people, withoug consent or prior knowledge.

Aliens

Okay, so maybe it is aliens, doing this on their own, without govt interference. They don’t inform us of their intentions, they leave bizarre clues, etc. They see what is happening to the earth and her inhabitants, yet they do absolutely nothing. They abduct people, try to implant objects and memories, etc. Sorry charlie, I don’t see how any good can come of this. If they are working alone, they are indeed evil.

The aliens, the govt and the military

Maybe they are all working together. Perhaps the aliens abduct people, the govt knows and allows it in exchange for technology and control, etc. Soo…this makes all entities involved evil.

I cannot entertain the possibility they are love and light. I am sorry, but I cannot. Look at human history and the control involved in such a thing.

I realize there are other tangible possibilities, but suspend your disbelief for a bit…ain’t no way they are here to help.

Heidi out.

The Fourth Kind is a science fiction/horror/thriller which was directed by Olatunde Osunanmi and stars Milla Jolovich.

The film is a documentary reenactment about ‘abductions’ that occurred in Nome, Alaska. Since the movies release Universal Studies has admitted that the ‘actual events’ and back-story were just the part of a guerilla marketing campaign.

At the beginning of the film it starts with Milla Jolovich saying that parts of the movie contain ‘real’ footage, audio samples and people. The film shows a mixture of reenactments and ‘old’ footage.

Im not really sure what to make of this film- i went to see it feeling unsure of what to expect. The film is engaging and keeps the audience interested but at the same time i felt it was hard to believe that it could be genuine. Parts of the footage were very creepy and proves that you dont need a big budget and special effects to scare an audience.

Parts of the footage seemed real but in some parts it became conveniently distorted and not fully visible. After seeing the film in decided to do some research to see if i could find out- mainly just speculations, people saying that it’s all fake and Dr.Tyler doesnt even exist.

So overall its worth seeing if you like films like ‘The Blair Witch Project’. It’s absorbing, disturbing and creepy but will most probably leave a lot of viewers disappointed and confused.

Film Rating: 6.5/10

Somer Thompson

In just a matter of a month the families and friends of Somer Thompson, Elizabeth Olten and Shaniya Davis have suffered losses beyond words.  Our country and even the world has been riveted by the tragic abductions and deaths of the innocence of these beautiful little girls.  These abductions and murders are so remote from each other – yet ending for each was the same, all three children have received their wings from our Spiritual Father.

The twists and turns of each case is outlandish – Elizabeth and Shaniya’s abductors and murderers have been found, arrested and charged but the community that Somer was a part of lives in fear on a daily basis as her assailant is still at large.

We will all sit and wait, glued to the media that will report any piece of information that may make any remote sense to all of us for the loss of these precious children.

Please keep all families in your thoughts and prayers and please don’t forget all of the other children who are not high profile cases that have simply vanished or have received their wings prior to the girls.

Elizabeth Olten

To assist parents I would like to share some guidelines to help you to make your child/children more safe.

Shaniya Davis

The first step in protecting your child from potential abductors is to know what you’re dealing with. Here are some important — and potentially surprising — facts about child abductions in the United States:

• Every 40 seconds in the United States, a child becomes missing or is abducted.
• In 2001, 840,279 people (adults and children) were reported missing to the FBI’s National Crime Information Center (NCIC). The FBI estimates that 85 to 90 percent of those (roughly 750,000 people or 2,000 per day) reported missing were children. The vast majority of these cases are resolved within hours.
• Based on the identity of the perpetrator, there are three distinct types of kidnapping: kidnapping by a relative of the victim or “family kidnapping” (49 percent), kidnapping by an acquaintance of the victim or “acquaintance kidnapping” (27 percent), and kidnapping by a stranger to the victim or “stranger kidnapping” (24 percent).
• Family kidnapping is committed primarily by parents, involves a larger percentage of female perpetrators (43 percent) than other types of kidnapping offenses, occurs more frequently to children under 6, equally victimizes juveniles of both sexes, and most often originates in the home.
• Acquaintance kidnapping involves a comparatively high percentage of juvenile perpetrators, has the largest percentage of female and teenage victims, is more often associated with other crimes (especially sexual and physical assault), occurs at homes and residences, and has the highest percentage of injured victims.
• Stranger kidnapping victimizes more females than males, occurs primarily at outdoor locations, victimizes both teenagers and school-age children, is associated with sexual assaults in the case of girl victims and robberies in the case of boy victims (although not exclusively so), and is the type of kidnapping most likely to involve the use of a firearm.
• Only about one child out of each 10,000 missing children reported to the local police is not found alive. However, about 20 percent of the children reported to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children in nonfamily abductions are not found alive.
• In 80 percent of abductions by strangers, the first contact between the child and the abductor occurs within a quarter mile of the child’s home.
• Most potential abductors grab their victims on the street or try to lure them into their vehicles.
• About 74 percent of the victims of nonfamily child abduction are girls.
• Acting quickly is critical. Seventy-four percent of abducted children who are ultimately murdered are dead within three hours of the abduction.
• One in five children 10 to 17 years old receive unwanted sexual solicitations online.
• In a 1998 study of parents’ worries by pediatricians at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota, nearly three-quarters of parents said they feared their children might be abducted. One-third of parents said this was a frequent worry — a degree of fear greater than that held for any other concern, including car accidents, sports injuries, or drug addiction.

Sources: Federal Bureau of Investigation; National Crime Information Center; U.S. Justice Dept.; Vanished Children’s Alliance; Redbook, February 1998; State of Washington’s Office of the Attorney General; United States Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice Delinquency Prevention Juvenile Justice Bulletin, June 2000

IN MEMORY OF ALL OF THE CHILDREN THAT ARE MISSING OR HAVE RECEIVED THEIR WINGS………..

I am a tiny angel …
I’m smaller than your thumb;
I live in people pockets,
That’s where I have my fun.

I don’t suppose you’ve seen me,
I’m too tiny to detect;
Though I’m with you all the time,
I doubt we’ve ever met.

Before I was an Angel …
I was a fairy in a flower;
God, Himself, hand-picked me,
And gave me Angel power.

Now God has many Angels
That He trains in Angel pools;
We become His eyes, and ears, and hands …
We become His special tools.

And because God is so busy,
With way too much to do;
He said that my assignment
Was to keep close watch on you.

Then He tucked me in your pocket,
Blessing you with Angel care;
Saying I must never leave you,
And I vowed to stay right there!

~ Virginia Ellis ~
Copyright © 1999

National Center for Missing and Exploited Children

FRANCE – Soirée du 5 novembre 1990 entre 19 h et 19 h 45.

A 19 heures, plusieurs milliers de témoignages venant des quatre coins de France et même d’Europe (notamment Londres) vont être reliés indiquant une observation massive d’un immense ensemble de lumières traversant de manière assez lente le ciel d’ouest en est. Diverses tailles d’ovnis furent aperçus, allant de quelques dizaines de mètres, de longues en forme triangulaires jusqu’aux probables vaisseaux mères de plusieurs centaines de mètres. En région parisienne, certains des employés des aéroports internationaux d’Orly et Roissy affirment avoir vu ce qu’ils décrivent comme étant un phénomène lumineux.  Ils en demandent alors confirmation au près des tours radar qui eux ne détectent absolument rien. Plus d’une semaine après le phénomène, le SEPRA continue de recevoir des appels de témoins désireux d’avoir des réponses sur ce qu’ils ont pu apercevoir. La NASA fait une réponse officielle le jeudi 8 novembre et affirme que pour le 5, il y avait eu la rentrée du troisième étage de la fusée soviétique Proton.

Archives : la rentrée atmosphérique du 5 novembre 1990

voir aussi

http://area51blog.wordpress.com/2009/04/07/vague-de-1990-400-ovnis-en-france/

By J. Michael Bone and Michael R. Walsh

Although parental alienation syndrome (PAS) is a familiar term, there is still a great deal of confusion and unclarity about its nature, dimensions, and, therefore, its detection.(1) Its presence, however, is unmistakable. In a longitudinal study of 700 “high conflict” divorce cases followed over 12 years, it was concluded that elements of PAS are present in the vast majority of the samples.(2) Diagnosis of PAS is reserved for mental health professionals who come to the court in the form of expert witnesses. Diagnostic hallmarks usually are couched in clinical terms that remain vague and open to interpretation and, therefore. susceptible to argument pro and con by opposing experts. The phenomenon of one parent turning the child against the other parent is not a complicated concept, but historically it has been difficult to identify clearly. Consequently, cases involving PAS are heavily litigated, filled with accusations and counter accusations, and thus leave the court with an endless search for details that eventually evaporate into nothing other than rank hearsay. It is our experience that the PAS phenomenon leaves a trail that can be identified more effectively by removing the accusation hysteria, and looking ahead in another positive direction.

For the purpose of this article the authors are assuming a fair degree of familiarity with parental alienation syndrome on the part of the reader.(3) There are many good writings on PAS which the reader may wish to consult now or in the future for general information. Our focus here is much more narrow. Specifically, the goal is twofold. First we will describe four very specific criteria that can be used to identify potential PAS. In most instances, these criteria can be identified through the facts of the case, but also can be revealed by deposition or court testimony. Secondly, we wish to introduce the concept of “attempted” PAS; that is when the criteria of PAS are present, but the child is not successfully alienated from the absent parent. This phenomenon is still quite harmful and the fact of children not being alienated should not be viewed as neutral by the court.

The criteria described below are fairly easy to identify separate and apart from the court file. When there is uncertainty about any of them, these criteria can be used to guide the attorney in the deposing of witnesses as well as in their examination in court.

Criteria I: Access and Contact Blocking

Criteria I involves the active blocking of access or contact between the child and the absent parent. The rationale used to justify it may well take many different forms. One of the most common is that of protection. It may be argued that the absent parent’s parental judgment is inferior and, therefore, the child is much worse off from the visit. In extreme cases, this will take the form of allegations of child abuse, quite often sexual abuse. This will be addressed in more detail in Criteria II, but suffice it to say that often this is heard as a reason for visitation to be suspended or even terminated. On a more subtle and common level, an argument heard for the blocking of visitation is that seeing the absent parent is “unsettling” to the child, and that they need time “to adjust.” The message here is that the absent parent is treated less like a key family member and more like an annoying acquaintance that the child must see at times. Over time, this pattern can have a seriously erosive effect on the child’s relationship with the absent parent. An even more subtle expression of this is that the visitation is “inconvenient,” thereby relegating it to the status of an errand or chore. Again the result is the erosion of the relationship between the child and the absent or “target” parent. One phenomenon often seen in this context is that any deviation from the schedule is used as a reason to cancel visitation entirely.

The common thread to all of these tactics is that one parent is superior and the other is not and, therefore, should be peripheral to the child’s life. The alienating parent in these circumstances is acting inappropriately as a gatekeeper for the child to see the absent parent. When this occurs for periods of substantial time, the child is given the unspoken but clear message that one parent is senior to the other. Younger children are more vulnerable to this message and tend to take it uncritically; however, one can always detect elements of it echoed even into the teenage years. The important concept here is that each parent is given the responsibility to promote a positive relationship with the other parent. When this principle is violated in the context of blocking access on a consistent basis, one can assume that Criteria I has been, unmistakably identified.

Criteria II: Unfounded Abuse Allegations

The second criteria is related to false or unfounded accusations of abuse against the absent parent. The most strident expression of this is the false accusation of sexual abuse.(4) It has been well studied that the incident of false allegations of sexual abuse account for over half of those reported, when the parents are divorcing or are in conflict over some post dissolution issue.(5) This is especially the situation with small children who are more vulnerable to the manipulations implied by such false allegations. When the record shows that even one report of such abuse is ruled as unfounded, the interviewer is well advised to look for other expressions of false accusations.

Other examples of this might be found in allegations of physical abuse that investigators later rule as being unfounded. Interestingly our experience has been that there are fewer false allegations of physical abuse than of other forms of abuse, presumably because physical abuse leaves visible evidence. It is, of course, much easier to falsely accuse someone of something that leaves no physical sign and has no third party witnesses.

A much more common expression of this pattern would be that of what would be termed emotional abuse. When false allegations of emotional abuse are leveled, one often finds that what is present is actually differing parental judgment that is being framed as “abusive” by the absent parent. For example, one parent may let a child stay up later at night than the other parent would, and this scheduling might be termed as being “abusive” or “detrimental” to the child. Or one parent might introduce a new “significant other” to the child before the other parent believes that they should and this might also be called “abusive” to the child. Alternatively one parent might enroll a child in an activity with which the other parent disagrees and this activity is, in actuality, a difference of parental opinion that is now described as being abusive in nature. These examples, as trivial as they seem individually, may be suggestive of a theme of treating parental difference in inappropriately subjective judgmental terms. If this theme is present, all manner of things can be described in ways that convey the message of abuse, either directly or indirectly. When this phenomenon occurs in literally thousands of different ways and times, each of which seems insignificant on its own, the emotional atmosphere that it creates carries a clearly alienating effect on the child.

Obviously, this type of acrimony is very common in dissolution actions but such conflict should not necessarily be mistaken or be taken as illustrative of the PAS syndrome; however, the criteria is clearly present and identifiable when the parent is eager to hurl abuse allegations, rather than being cautious, careful. and even reluctant to do so. This latter stance is more in keeping with the parent’s responsibility to encourage and affirmatively support a relationship with the other parent. The responsible parent will only allege abuse after he or she has tried and failed to rationalize why the issue at hand is not abusive. Simply put, the responsible parent will give the other parent the benefit of the doubt when such allegations arise. He or she will, if anything, err on the side of denial, whereas the alienating parent will not miss an opportunity to accuse the other parent. When this theme is present in a clear and consistent way, this criteria for PAS is met.

Criteria III: Deterioration in Relationship Since Separation

The third of the criteria necessary for the detection of PAS is probably the least described or identified, but critically is one of the most important. It has to do with the existence of a positive relationship between the minor children and the now absent or nonresidential parent, prior to the marital separation; and a substantial deterioration, of it since then. Such a recognized decline does not occur on its own. It is, therefore, one of the most important indicators of the presence of alienation as well. as a full measure of its relative “success.” By way of example, if a father had a good and involved relationship with the children prior to the separation, and a very distant one since, then one can only assume without explicit proof to the contrary that something caused it to change. If this father is clearly trying to maintain a positive relationship with the children through observance of visitation and other activities and the children do not want to see him or have him involved in their lives, then one can only speculate that an alienation process may have been in operation. Children do not naturally lose interest in and become distant from their nonresidential parent simply by virtue of the absence of that parent. Also, healthy and established parental relationships do not erode naturally of their own accord. They must be attacked. Therefore, any dramatic change in this area is virtually always an indicator of an alienation process that has had some success in the past.

Most notably, if a careful evaluation of the pre-separation parental relationship is not made, its omission creates an impression that the troubled or even alienated status that exists since is more or lees an accurate summary of what existed previously. Note that nothing could be further from the truth! An alienated or even partially or intermittently alienated relationship with the nonresidential parent and the children after the separation is more accurately a distortion of the real parental relationship in question. Its follow-through is often overlooked in the hysterical atmosphere that is often present in these cases. A careful practitioner well knows that a close examination is warranted and that it must be conducted with the utmost detail and scrutiny.

If this piece of the puzzle is left out, the consequences can be quite devastating for the survival of this relationship. Also, without this component, the court can be easily swayed into premature closure or fooled into thinking that the turmoil of the separation environment is representative of the true parent-child relationship. Once this ruling is made by the court, it is an exacting challenge to correct its perception.

In a separate but related issue, a word should be said about the use of experts. First, it must be understood that all mental health professionals are not aware of nor know how to treat the PAS phenomenon. In fact, when a mental health professional unfamiliar with PAS is called upon to make a recommendation about custody, access, or related issues, he or she potentially can do more harm than good. For example, if the psychologist fails to investigate the pre-separation relationship of the nonresidential parent and the children, he or she may very easily mistake the current acrimony in that relationship to be representative of it, and recommend that the children should have less visitation with that parent, obviously supporting the undiagnosed PAS that is still in progress. If that expert also fails to evaluate critically the abuse claims or the agenda of the claimant, they may be taken at face value and again potentially support the undiagnosed PAS. If that professional is not also sensitive to the subtleties of access and contact blocking as its motivator, he or she may potentially support it, thereby contributing to the PAS process. When these things occur, the mental health professional expert has actually become part of the PAS, albeit unwittingly. Alarmingly, this happens often. Suffice it to say, if PAS is suspected, the attorney should closely and carefully evaluate the mental health professional’s investigation and conclusion. Failure to do so can cause irreparable harm to the case, and, ultimately to the children.

Criteria IV: Intense Fear Reaction by Children

The fourth criteria necessary for the detection of PAS is admittedly more psychological than the first three. It refers to an obvious fear reaction on the part of the children, of displeasing or disagreeing with the potentially alienating parent in regard to the absent or potential target parent. Simply put, an alienating parent operates by the adage, “My way or the highway.” If the children disobey this directive, especially in expressing positive approval of the absent parent, the consequences can be very serious. It is not uncommon for an alienating parent to reject the child(ren), often telling him or her that they should go live with the target parent. When this does occur one often sees that this threat is not carried out, yet it operates more as a message of constant warning. The child, in effect, is put into a position of being the alienating parent’s “agent” and is continually being put through various loyalty tests. The important issue here is that the alienating patent thus forces the child to choose parents. This, of course, is in direct opposition to a child’s emotional well being.

In order to fully appreciate this scenario, one must realize that the PAS process operates in a “fear based” environment. It is the installation of fear by the alienating parent to the minor children that is the fuel by which this pattern is driven; this fear taps into what psychoanalysis tell us is the most basic emotion inherent in human nature–the fear of abandonment. Children under these conditions live in a state of chronic upset and threat of reprisal. When the child does dare to defy the alienating parent, they quickly learn that there is a serious price to pay. Consequently, children who live such lives develop an acute sense of vigilance over displeasing the alienating parent. The sensitized observer can see this in visitation plans that suddenly change for no apparent reason. For example, when the appointed time approaches, the child suddenly changes his or her tune and begins to loudly protest a visit that was not previously complained about. It is in these instances that a court, once suspecting PAS must enforce in strict terms the visitation schedule which otherwise would not have occurred or would have been ignored.

The alienating parent can most often be found posturing bewilderment regarding the sudden change in their child’s feelings about the visit. In fact, the alienating parent often will appear to be the one supporting visitation. This scenario is a very common one in PAS families. It is standard because it encapsulates and exposes, if only for an instant, the fear-based core of the alienation process. Another way to express this concept would be that whenever the child is given any significant choice in the visitation, he or she is put in the position to act out a loyalty to the alienating parent’s wishes by refusing to have the visitation at all with the absent parent. Failure to do so opens the door for that child’s being abandoned by the parent with whom the child lives the vast majority of the time. Children, under these circumstances, will simply not opt on their own far a free choice. The court must thus act expeditiously to protect them and employ a host of specific and available remedies.(6)

As a consequence of the foregoing, these children learn to manipulate. Children often play one parent against the other in an effort to gain some advantage. In the case of PAS, the same dynamic operates at more desperate level. No longer manipulating to gain advantage, these children learn to manipulate just to survive. They become expert beyond their years at reading the emotional environment, telling partial truths, and then telling out-and-out lies. One must, however, remember that these are survival strategies that they were forced to learn in order to keep peace at home and avoid emotional attack by the residential parent. Given this understanding, it is perhaps easier to see why children, in an effort to cope with this situation, often find it easier if they begin to internalize the alienating parent’s perceptions of the absent parent and begin to echo these feelings. This is one of the most compelling and dramatic effects of PAS, that is, hearing a child vilifying the absent parent and joining the alienating parent in such attacks. If one is not sensitive to the “fear-based” core at the heart of this, it is difficult not to take the child’s protests at face value. This, of course, is compounded when the expert is also not sensitive to this powerful fear component, and believes that the child is voicing his or her own inner feelings in endorsing the “no visitation” plan.

Conclusion

All the criteria listed above can be found independent of each other in highly contested dissolutions, but remember that the appearance of some of them does not always constitute PAS. When all four are clearly present, however, add the possibility of real abuse has been reasonably ruled out, the parental alienation process is operative. This does not necessarily mean, however, that it is succeeding in that the children are being successfully alienated from the target parent. The best predictor of successful alienation is directly related to the success of the alienating parent at keeping the children from the target parent. When there are substantial periods in which they do not see the other parent, the children are more likely to be poisoned by the process. Another variable that predicts success is the child’s age. Younger children generally are more vulnerable than older ones. Also, another variable is the depth and degree of involvement of the pre-separation parent-child relationship. The longer and more involved that relationship, the less vulnerable will be the children to successful alienation. The final predictor is the parental tenacity of the target parent. A targeted parent often gives up and walks away, thus greatly increasing the chances of successful alienation.

The question remains: What if all four criteria are present, but the children are not successfully alienated? Should this failure at alienation be seen as nullifying the attempt at alienation? The answer to that should be a resounding “No!” It should be, but often it is not. It is very common to read a psychological evaluation or a GAL’s report that identified PAS but then notes that since it was not successful, it should not be taken very seriously. Nothing could be further from the truth. Any attempt at alienating the children from the other parent should be seen as a direct and willful violation of one of the prime duties of parenthood, which is to promote and encourage a positive and loving relationship with the other parent, and the concept of shared parental responsibility.

It is our feeling that when attempted PAS has been identified, successful or not, it must be dealt with swiftly by the court. If it is not, it will contaminate and quietly control all other parenting issues and then lead only to unhappiness, frustration, and, lastly, parental estrangement.

Published by: ABP World Group International Child Recovery Service

Visit our web site at: www.abpworld.com

ABP World Group Ltd. now offer our clients live consultations by Skype or MSN Messenger

Skype: abpworld

MSN:   abpworld@hotmail.com

Contact mail: post@abpworld.com

Visit our web site for more information about our services at www.abpworld.com

Well, I would love to share the sequence of my interests, experiences and discoveries in chronological order with you on this blog, but that’s just not going to happen. Sorry. You will just have to take it in whatever order my silly mind spits it out. I’m not the greatest writer the world has ever known.   I’m trusting that eventually you will come to feel like you know me, as well as what I think about, quite well! If you leave me comments, then I can get to know you too, which I would love.

There is a lot of strange stuff in my life at the moment that I am making sense of.  I run a kind of paranormal topic group for my community. I attract various speakers on topics that we are all curious about.  Last month’s speaker was a trim and neat appearing woman with a background in corporate America, whose path had radically shifted. She is now a shamanic practitioner and explains that she is aware of her multidimensional existence.  In one of these dimensional existences she attends meetings of something called “earth council” and often communicates with aliens and beings from other dimensions.  Yeah. exactly. You can take a minute to read it again.

Now, I watched the x-files like so many of us, and even grew to develop a deep crush on Fox Mulder for many years (it still lives somewhere deep inside me….*sigh*. He was so PASSIONATE about finding the truth, God love ‘em).  But somewhere along the way in my life, I started to feel that there was too much paranoia and disfunction in the ufo/abductee community for me to be able to take it seriously.

So when I met this woman who explained she frequently spoke with and saw aliens, I was stumped. You see, as a doctor, I have sat with many people who see things we don’t see and need medication to make their lives functional–schizophrenics, those with schizoaffective disorder or depression with psychosis.  You get the idea.  I have always suspected that these folks may be tapping into some kind of spiritual realm at times, but that something has gone terribly wrong with the regulation of that within the brain. The bottom line is, they don’t do well in the physical world and are the poster children for “crazy”.

Well, this lady had nothing in common with them. She was educated, focused, intelligent and articulate.  She was not sharing her information for monetary gain. And she stood the risk of public ridicule and rejection.

She was so different from my stereotype of one who loses functional contact with reality, that I was forced to do some reading.  So, after a good 20 years having passed from my childhood queries, I re-investigated what was available about UFO’s and aliens.  And my paradigm definitely has changed, just in the last two weeks! For the witnesses coming foward have become more credible, and the amount of documentable facts has grown to something I cannot ignore.

There is this recent giant leap in my paradigm regarding other forms of life in our universe and its contact with us.  Simultaneously, I have begun spending time with a talented clairvoyant (Pat Bruckmann, www.36stones.com )who works at an upscale  resort. She too has a corporate background, and is very intelligent and articulate.  She wholeheartedly believes that her intuition (which can be so accurate that it creeps her out at times) is a concrete brain function.  She is as curious about getting into her head and poking around to see how things work as I am!

Our personalities are a natural match and we have become friends, and also partners in doing her weekly channeling work.  I am there to probe, prod and ask questions as she brings forth some incredible material.

Lastly, I have signed up to do a remote viewing workshop in a few weeks. The gentleman who runs it claims that he has only met one person who could not learn this function from him.  Well, I’m ready to put myself to the test and try.  They say you need to set the logical mind aside to do it, so I am going to have to really work to get there, but I absolutely believe that I’ll get it. The CIA used it, we know this now for a fact. Also, many corporations are now using it.  Isn’t it odd how everyone is cashing in on its usefullness, but no one is saying “OH MY GOD, what does this then mean about the way everything works!!!??!!”. Its implications are HUGE, yet constantly overlooked by our culture. interesting.

These are examples of the current topics that I am sorting my way through. I will share it all with you as it unfolds. Just please give me a shout out once in awhile in the comments section. There are days when I already feel crazy enough…don’t want to feel like I’m talking to myself!

Guarding Against International Parental Child Abduction

Source: U.S Department of State

Parental child abduction is a federal crime.  It is also a tragedy that jeopardizes children and has substantial long-term consequences for the “left-behind” parent, the child, the family, and society. Children who are abducted by their parents are often suddenly isolated from their extended families, friends, and classmates. They are at risk of serious emotional and psychological problems. Similarly, left-behind parents experience a wide range of emotions including betrayal, loss, anger, and depression. In international cases, they often face unfamiliar legal, cultural, and linguistic barriers that compound these emotions.

In this section of our Web site, learn about the measures you can take to prevent your child from being wrongfully taken to or wrongfully kept in another country.  In addition to the materials below, also see these important links:

• Children’s Passport Issuance Alert Program
• Passport Requirements for Minors
• Additional Prevention Tools
• For Attorneys & Judges

International Parental Child Abduction Is Illegal

Under the laws of the United States and many foreign countries, international parental child abduction is crime.  Removing a child from the United States against another parent’s wishes can be considered a crime in every U.S. state.  In some cases an abducting parent may be charged with a Federal crime under the International Parental Kidnapping Crime Act (IPKCA).  This can be the case even when neither parent holds a custody decree prior to the abduction. Nevertheless, a custody decree can be helpful to prevent an international parental child abduction, or to recover your child if he/she is abducted.

The Importance of a Custody Decree

A well-written custody decree is an important line of defense against international parental child abduction. In your custody decree, it may be advisable to include a statement that prohibits your child from traveling abroad without your permission or that of the court. Ask your attorney if you should obtain a decree of sole custody or a decree that prohibits the travel of your child without your permission or that of the court.  If you have or would prefer to have a joint custody decree, you may want to make certain that it prohibits your child from traveling abroad without your permission or that of the court.

If your child is at risk of being taken to a country that partners with the United States under the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction (Hague Abduction Convention), your custody decree should include the terms of the Hague Abduction Convention that apply if there is an abduction or wrongful retention (see country list).

The American Bar Association also suggests requesting the court, if the other parent is not a U.S. citizen or has significant ties to a foreign country, to require that parent to post a bond. This may be useful both as a deterrent to abduction and, if forfeited because of an abduction, as a source of revenue for you in your efforts to locate and recover your child.

REMINDER: Obtain several certified copies of your custody decree from the court that issued it. Give a copy to your child’s school and advise school personnel to whom your child may be released.

Two Parent Signature Law for a Passport

The United States does not have exit controls on its borders for holders of a valid passport.  This makes preventing a passport from being issued to your child without your consent very important.  Generally, if your child has a passport, it can be difficult to prevent the other parent from removing the child to another country without your permission.

U.S. law requires the signature of both parents, or the child’s legal guardians, prior to issuance of a U.S. passport to children under the age of 16.  To obtain a U.S. passport for a child under the age of 16, both parents (or the child’s legal guardians) must execute the child’s passport application and provide documentary evidence demonstrating that they are the parents or guardians.  If this cannot be done, the person executing the passport application must provide documentary evidence that he or she has sole custody of the child, has the consent of the other parent to the issuance of the passport, or is acting in place of the parents and has the consent of both parents (or of a parent/legal guardian with sole custody over the child to the issuance of the passport).

EXCEPTIONS: The law does provide two exceptions to this requirement: (1) for exigent circumstances, such as those involving the health or welfare of he child, or (2) when the Secretary of State determines that issuance of a passport is warranted by special family circumstances.

Read more: Passport Requirements for Minors

Children’s Passport Issuance Alert Program

You may also ask that your child’s name be entered into the State Department’s Children’s Passport Issuance Alert Program (CPIAP).  Entering your child into the Children’s Passport Issuance Alert Program will enable the Department to notify you or your attorney if an application for a U.S. passport for the child is received anywhere in the United States or at any U.S. embassy or consulate abroad. If you have a court order that either grants you sole custody, joint legal custody, or prohibits your child from traveling without your permission or the permission of the court, the Department may refuse to issue a new or renewal U.S. passport for your child. The Department may not, however, revoke a passport that has already been issued to the child. There is also no way to track the use of a passport once it has been issued, since there are no exit controls for people leaving the U.S. If your child already has a passport, you should take steps to ensure that it is kept from a potential abductor by asking the court or attorneys to hold it.

IMPORTANT TO KEEP IN MIND:

1. The United States does not have exit controls.
2. The Department of State may not revoke a passport that has been issued to a child, but you can ask a court to hold onto it.
3. There is no way to track the use of a passport once it has been issued.
4. Your child might also be a citizen of another country (dual nationality).  Even if he/she does not have a U.S. passport, your child may be able to travel on the other country’s passport.

The Privacy Act and Passports

Passport information is protected by the provisions of the Privacy Act (PL 93-579) passed by Congress in 1974. Information regarding a minor’s passport is available to either parent. Information regarding adults may be available to law enforcement officials or pursuant to a court order issued by the court of competent jurisdiction in accordance with (22 CFR 51.27). For further information regarding the issuance or denial of United States passports to minors involved in custody disputes, please contact Passport Services.

Published by: ABP World Group International Child Recovery Service

Visit our web site at: www.abpworld.com

 Source: boulder weekly

Tuesday, November 17,2009

By McClatchy-Tribune News Service

SAN’A, Yemen — A Japanese technician and his Yemeni driver were abducted Sunday by a tribal group in Yemen, according to the Japanese Embassy in Yemen.

The two were abducted in Arhab, a city close to the nation’s capital, San’a. They are said to be in good physical condition, and the Yemeni government has began negotiations with the group for their release, the embassy said.

According to a Japanese government source, the 63-year-old technician, works for an architectural design office in Tokyo.

The man and the driver were abducted Sunday afternoon while on their way to a school construction site located northeast of the capital.

Later in the day, the embassy received a phone call from the man saying he had been abducted. The embassy is able to contact the man via cell phone, the embassy said.

There has been no ransom demand. However, according to Agence France Presse, local sources told the news agency the tribal group is demanding that the Yemeni government release a member of the tribe who has been detained for four years without trial.

According to the Web site of the man’s company, the firm has been helping construct schools in Africa and Southeast Asia at the behest of the Foreign Ministry or the Japan International Cooperation Agency. The office received an order to build primary and middle schools in Yemen in 2005, and the man has been working in the area where he was kidnapped since March.

Foreigners are frequently abducted in Yemen, mainly in areas ruled by tribal groups that are beyond the control of the central government. More than 200 abductions have been reported since 1990, including a case in May 2008 in which two Japanese tourists were abducted at gunmen. They were released later in the month unharmed.

The Metropolitan Police Department on Tuesday began investigating the incident as a case of kidnapping for ransom, after learning that the kidnapped man is a Tokyo resident.

The MPD applied a Penal Code provision that allows it to investigate serious crimes overseas involving Japanese. The prefectural police in charge of the area where the victim resides will handle the case.

Via McClatchy-Tribune News Service.