[AKidsRight.Org] Your FEEDBACK: On Bad People / Faith & Sacrifice / Dad ONLY Custody.

webmaster@akidsright.org

This is a message from the AKidsRight.Org mailing list.  Unsubscribe instructions at bottom of message.
=======================================
Good People & People of Faith,

This message contains information on:

1. A 14 percenter - are You? Signup for the newsletter.
2. NoBigLies.Org - okay in Family Court
3. Dialog - how much sacrifice?
4. Your FEEDBACK - on BAD people.
5. Your FEEDBACK - on sacrifice.
6. Father ONLY custody - solution or the other extreme!

We hope you will take the time to think about some of these dialogs.  It
is a good collection on important issues.  When you write in you are
welcome to give us another reply to our comments -- and we give you the
last word.... No one likes the editor having the final say!  

Your messages below prefaced by ">"

1. A 14 percenter - signup for the newsletter.
----------------------------------------------

--- Contact: Donald Mathis <Donald.Mathis@trinity.edu>

> A publication for parents on the wrong side of the standard possession
> order.

> "I see my child two days out of every fourteen; 14%.  That's not
> enough."

2. NoBigLies.Org - okay in Family Court
---------------------------------------

[Steve was charged with libel by a judge in New Brunswick when he
picketed the court with a sign denouncing him as accepting lies.  When
confronted with evidence that the spouse had lied during testimony, the
Judge's response was that 'no big lies' in Court are okay!]

--- From: "Advocate" <male6@telus.net>

> May 7th, 2004, that's 5 years to the day since Steve Osborne, from New
> Brunswick, last saw his two kids and 5 years since the big theory came
> out, judges accepting lies. Steve will be visible in front of Family
> Court, rest assured, and he needs your help!

> All you need to do is spend some time in front of your court carrying
> a sign that says:    http://ww.nobiglies.org/

--- From: Gordon M. MacLean <:g.m.maclean@sympatico.ca>

SJ Telegraph-Journal | Courts/Crime
As published on page A3 on January 23, 2004
Accused claims judges receive 'secret training'
COURTS: Man charged with libeling judge chooses to defend himself

BY BRUCE BARTLETT
Telegraph-Journal

Stephen Charles Osborne, facing the seldom - used Criminal Code charge
of libeling a judge, was back in court in Saint John Thursday to defend
himself.

The case appeared to go off the rails in December 2002 when Justice
Robert McIntyre of the Court of Queen's Bench stayed the proceedings
because the province refused to pay for lawyer from Ontario to defend
Mr. Osborne.

In early 2002 Mr. Osborne was charged with three counts of libeling
Justice Raymond Guerette of the Court of Queen's Bench, Family
Division. Since 1999, Mr. Osborne has at times carried signs outside the
provincial building in Saint John accusing Judge Guerette of condoning
lying in his court.

In 1999, Mr. Osborne lost custody of his two children to his ex-wife,
who then moved to Toronto. The decision to grant custody to his ex-wife
was made by Justice Guerette....

3. Dialog - how much sacrifice?
--------------------------------

--- From: Stephen Osborne <steveo@brunnet.net> (story above) 

> Whether there's a 10% chance or a .0001% chance that bullet will
> hit my kids I'm getting in between them, period, but I have tell you
> that I don't see it as a sacrifice - it's my responsibility as a
> parent.

> I trust you will recognize the similarity between this work and
> military service - volunteering to stand between war's destruction and
> one's family is not much different than this work from where I sit....

> I have found that the criminal justice system in Canada is confounded
> when a parent will not be deterred by the threat of imprisonment from
> taking action against the injustices of the family court system.  They
> don't seem to be able to come to terms with the fact that there is no
> "punishment" at their disposal that accomplishes their objective -
> silencing me.  I think there's a very powerful tool in that for the
> movement to protect parental relationships and strong message to the
> judiciary and the policy makers that can make our wishes reality.

> It won't take many cases like the one here to drive that message home,
> but where are all the other parents that have lost their kids is a
> question I am having more trouble answering every time - why is no one
> else doing the same thing if there's a problem is a line I keep
> hearing.  One case like mine and I'm a crackpot, 2 cases like mine
> makes it a coincidence, but 3 or more makes it an issue.  The only
> thing that has prevented them labeling me so far is that I keep going
> back for more and I keep telling the same story every time I get the
> chance.

> They also know, because I have made it abundantly clear on the record
> that I will re-offend if necessary, and that what happened to my kids
> will be examined in a rules-based environment before I stop.

I think the big reason there are not a lot of people on the 'band wagon'
is that they would like to have some amount of confidence that it will
"work."  A sacrifice is a stretch at any time, but you want to have some
confidence that it is worth it.  What do you expect to 'deliver' to
others for this effort?

I have "tempered" my activities because of the what the consequences may
be and I assume you have also.  You could have stood your ground outside
the building, maybe gone to jail, but gotten a "speedy" trial on the
issues and been done with this years ago?  I feel that same way about my
activities and I have thought about that more lately -- the 'sacrifices'
we feel we have made are so minor.  Why should people get excited about
it?

How about standing outside the office of an MP and getting them to take
a position on the issues of reforming the system for parent's rights?
Maybe you would have better luck than I appear to be having here?

> I have also tempered my work here, trying to stretch the envelope but
> only a bit at a time so as people can keep up.  Its no good to go all
> the way alone, the work has to drag some people's thinking with it, so
> I have toned down to make it possible.

> I don't know if your legal system is the same, but if I had stayed at
> the court the reaction would not have highlighted the issues that are
> important to me.  The speedy trial would have been about me breaking
> the terms of my release, not the big lies theory that got me started,
> and it would have been a trial by judge alone event.

> That would have given the Crown a previous conviction to point to at
> the trial into the main issue, so it seemed a counter-productive way
> of doing business to me.

> I can't agree with you about the efforts we've made to date.  They may
> not be of the same magnitude as Christ's sacrifice, or those of the
> men and women that have gone to war and been KIA or MIA, but they're
> important sacrifices none the less.  I look at your work and mine and
> I see one major difference between what we do and what usually happens
> - we keep going back, with full knowledge of the implications.

> Its one thing to go out when you don't know what might happen, but its
> an entirely different thing to go back out when you know exactly where
> it will take you in the end.

> As far as working elected reps, I see no point yet in Canada, not
> until the political climate has changed some.  I have visited a dozen
> or more MP's on the issue of parental rights, and every last one
> except Roger Gallaway is terrified of losing the vote from the women's
> side of the aisle - all of them.

> That means there needs to be some work done to change the attitudes in
> the general public first.  Education so to speak.  My own MP sat and
> listened politely, then asked who the judge was.  When I told her, her
> response was " Oh, Ray" and I knew in that instant there was no help
> for me in her office.

--- From: "w w" <dadsareforever@yahoo.com>

> ... Sorry to hear you have to go back to jail, You are very lucky to
> have a support group, if or when I get thrown in jail I would lose my
> rental and all. It would be the end.

It is never that easy.  There is cost for everyone -- if jail was a
'cake walk', it wouldn't be sacrifice would it?  To make it blunt, we
don't think the sacrifice will matter anyway, so why should I lose my
property?  Makes a lot of sense.

But the other message is, my property/stuff is more important than any
chance of reform...

> About Mr Jaks, He cant be that stupid to think he would not get
> caught, I can think of three reasons he left with his son: He had a
> vacation planned and the mother stopped it so he took it anyway, his
> right, or he gave up and wanted to see his son while he was still a
> kid or he would start a new life with his son (unlikely), just as the
> mother did under color of authority and moron society choosing her as
> the better parent. Did you see the picture they posted of Lowell and
> the one of the mother and 'new' father? It's all the same, in the end
> he does not get to raise his own child, so what changes.

> Those that get some time with their child are different that those who
> get none. Speaking for my self, if one is unable to have any joy in
> their life, there is no life. Some people do not have the love and
> attachment to their children that others have, they are the ones that
> go along with things and maybe see their "children" when they become
> adults.

Yes, that has to be torture to see your child with other 'parents',
while you are left out.

4. Your FEEDBACK - on BAD people!
---------------------------------

--- From: "Brad Herman" <Brad.Herman@mssm.edu>

> I agree with your ideas on Faith and Sacrifice.  While I do not know
> much about Lent as I am not of the Catholic faith, I think the
> principles are worthy of study.  I wonder if any caseworkers of Child
> Protective Services have read this web site.  While I understand that
> as parents, all of us have some flaws which make us "humans" NOT bad
> parents, I add that those caseworkers that have willfully destroyed
> the intimate bond between a parent and child and have inflicted a
> plethora of emotional pain on innocent families should as you put it:
> "Fast, and weep, and mourn -- EMBRACE your faults and failings.  Your
> imperfectness, your humanity."  In this regard, I agree with all but
> the last word in that statement: "your humanity".  

> No caseworker that does this to a family should be considered a human
> being!  To me, they are no better than dog droppings that end up on
> the bottom of my shoe when somebody outside forgets to curb their dog.
> They abuse their power simply because they have been given an enormous
> amount of power from the state.  I tend to go by the saying: "what
> goes around comes around".  They will get what they deserve
> eventually.  Keep up the good work Mr. Murtari!  > --Brad

Thanks for the message, but I think you may be cutting the social
workers short.  Right now we 'expect' them to guess and act to protect
children -- even when they don't have clear proof.  OUR elected
representatives passed the laws that gave them that kind of power, that
the criminal legal system was too cumbersome, abuse would be "too hard
to prove" to a jury.  WE just wanted the social workers and judges to
get the "real" facts and do the right thing.

That was a mistake, but it was OUR mistake.  Those laws need to change.

--- From: Bill <onenation11@hotmail.com>

> You made an interesting observation about comparing "bad people" or a
> "bad system" and you have concluded that the system is bad.  I would
> *strongly* encourage you to study our Founding Father's design for
> this country, our system of government was designed *ONLY* for good
> people.  PERIOD!  And that's the end of the subject.

> The Founders even said so themselves.  When the people's morals and
> manners are no longer firmly anchored they said the system of
> government they designed would fail.  It was designed *exclusively*
> for a moral people with strong values and character.  It would never
> work for any other.  NEVER!   What we have is a good system full of
> bad people who are working to pervert and destroy the best system ever
> devised by man.  Unfortunately, we have an all too complicit, willing
> and "bad" populace who are too ready to go along with the perversion
> and corruption--, so long as the perversion and corruption are what
> they want, and in their favor.

> No, we have the best system ever devised filled with some of the most
> vile and despicable individuals this country has ever had to endure.
> Evil people do evil things, "systems" don't do anything.  They just
> enable or disable certain traits of the individuals within the system.

> Give it some serious thought and you'll see what I mean...  Systems
> don't give life, action, or response to anything.  Only people do, and
> some are decent people, others, especially those inhabiting the legal
> system, are vile and despicable.

Not sure if I agree.  If you read American History and get a feel for
politics in the 1700's -- it was not too much different than it is now.
People were just as short-sighted then and I don't expect that to change
any time soon.  But in the great scheme of things -- we are moving
forward.  I think the founding Fathers knew that also -- sometimes real
EVIL gets ahead, there are no excuses for a Hitler or a Saddam Hussein
-- but that happens when the good people don't DO anything.

Please, spare me the "vile and despicable" about the folks working in
our legal system.  For the most part they are no different than you and
I.  The questions is, "what have YOU done to make this system better?"
The founding Fathers also understood sacrifice -- does that have any
meaning for you?

Our "system" works well because of "checks" and "balances". In the legal
system the protection of a JURY and a presumption of INNOCENCE put up a
roadblock to overreaching government.  Those "checks" are not in place
in Family law -- they need to be.

5. Your FEEDBACK - on Sacrifice & Faith
----------------------------------------

--- From: Glan Richards <GLANR342@aol.com>   Swansea, West Wales

> Keep the faith boy, but even that sentiment sounds crazy, perversely
> sarcastic but in your case it makes it even more so - you get to see
> your son and then get to do more penitence.  I cant believe it, but
> hopefully your son, and I hope you have a good time together will see
> the injustice one day and then maybe you will have a whole new ball
> game on your hands.

Yes, I just brought him back.  We had a great time together and I'm so
thankful for that.  Like you say below, a lot of people just lose
contact with their child -- what an awful thing!

> I have this haunting memory of the last time I saw my son -October
> 2001 when he was about to leave he had this strange look in his eyes,
> as if to say this is the last time I am going to see you, the evil
> stepmom came to pick him up and he was gone.  We had good
> conversations on the phone but the corrupt legal Stalinist process has
> made it a lot worse and the Christmas just gone proves this because he
> now thinks I am just a Santa dad talk to his ol man for presents and
> the birthday present a month hence and that is that.  

> He has just turned 15 and the influence of a sicko stepdad has taken
> it's toll, his whole culture has changed and I don't know where to
> turn. No more Illegal courts it gets you nowhere and then what.  KEEP
> THE FAITH?  

> Pob Hwyl John - in Welsh that means best wishes and man I mean just
> that.  

Being a teenager is a tough time and it just becomes amazing when you
get to pick and choose between parents.  I can't even imagine what I
would have done as a kid.  I hope that as the years go by he will come
to appreciate what he had with you.

> I appreciate your reply, it does not seem much but, it means a lot.  I
> was reminded today of some relatives of my mother's in Perkinswood
> Ohio, whom I thought were no longer around and I will be dropping them
> a line sooner rather than later to catch up on things.  So John thanks
> for now will keep a lookout for your mailings.  

> Diolch yn fawr. (thanks a lot)

--- From: Caren MacDonald <Donnaragan@aol.com>

> I feel like you were reading my mind....how much are we willing to
> sacrifice?  I have spent time in jail, I have taken my son, I have
> fought court battles and been accused of parent alienation, I have
> contacted the press, walked on 3 picket lines in front of the court
> house, and on and on. I feel a little lost in this 7 year battle, what
> to do next, how many times can I be beat up by the system and punished
> for being an imperfect parent. Some people tell me that maybe my son
> doesn't even want to see me now. He is 14 and I raised him until he
> was 12, I miss him terribly and have not seen him in over 18 months,
> because

> I have a Judge who has delayed making a visitation decision 5 times in
> the last year. My ex-husband doesn't think my son needs a mother or
> his older sister, and it seems like the court has very little concern
> for the best interest of the child.  Have a great week with your son
> and cherish every moment

Sorry to hear you haven't seen your child in 18 months because of a
delayed decision.  That is unbelievable (but it happens all the time).
They keep your child away for years and then tell you your child doesn't
feel comfortable with you or doesn't want to see you -- pretty amazing
stuff!

--- From: "Arthur Miles" <arte@optonline.net>

> I am happy for you that you have your son for spring break.  I wish
> you both the best time together.  When my court case (divorce) is done
> I will get arrested with you and proudly as I will work for 50/50
> equal parenting for all.

> You will be happy to know last time in court ( the system is screwed)
> I "won" more time with my children, I am now at 33% time and working
> toward 50%.

--- From: Joanne Rudman <aces4kids_jo@yahoo.com>

> Perhaps a simple solution would be to address your messages to "People
> of good faith" since it does not distinguish good people from people
> of Faith.  Even though most of us know what you mean, this simple
> semantic expression should not cause such a furor amongst those of us
> who do choose to support you and your peaceful protestations.  Faith
> does not necessarily mean religious faith in any affiliation of
> doctrine.

> We all have faith in at least ourselves; otherwise we would not
> believe in the cause of trying to reform the court system.  I know
> that in my own home state the branch of the court that handles all
> divorce/separation issues is referred to as "Family Division."  This
> division is exactly what the system promotes since it pays their
> salaries with our monies that could have benefited our kids in the
> first place.  Kids should be kept out of the equation of divorce and
> should be entitled to both parents as nature intended.  (I personally
> attribute all to God, but even an agnostic/atheist should be able to
> accept this fact.)

> We also have faith in our kids, especially when we are denied access
> and communication.  That faith keeps the spark of hope alive and keeps
> the love enduring to the end.

Actually, that is why I use "Faith" instead of "faith" -- to make the
distinction between religious faith and all else. Thanks for the message!

--- From: Rosemary Baker <roscart@yahoo.com>

> I am writing you in hopes that you may remember my ordeal with the
> court system here in coles county Illinois.  I have now came to a
> point where I can no longer deal with the political system which is
> corrupt and prejudice.  I suffer each and everyday, my pain and
> loneliness for my children is more than I can take for one more day.
> I have come to the conclusion that I can find no help anywhere, I
> have lived my life since a young child, independent, self reliant
> and strong, yet this one thing has broken a strong mind and soul. I
> have no where to turn I can not seem to do this my emotional turmoil
> prevents me from doing what I know in the past for someone else I
> would have greatly achieved. for once in my life I beg anyone who is
> a kind person to help me.  I've never needed or asked let alone
> begged anybody for help when the ability is within, but I know I
> cannot reach within me to do this, I am not strong now.

 > please help me 
 > my children need you, I need you

 > Miss Rosemary Baker "We must become the change we want to see in
 > the world."                 Ghandi   

I checked my mail and saw your message from January and how you are
being rolled over by the system.  It is an awful thing and it can tear
a person up inside (especially when you love your kids).  Like I said
then, you are welcome to post your story at our site,
http://www.AKidsRight.Org/shame.htm

Regarding help, I think you are on the mailing list and I see you use
the quote from Gandhi as a tag line (although I guess right now it is
just a tag line, not something you really believe in?).  There are
plenty of positive actions you can take, but they are scary and require
Sacrifice and real Faith.  They are not for everybody.  Certainly,
taking action has given me a LOT of relief from the pain I felt over
my son.  I am now DOING something....

But it is not for everyone, It may not be for you. But do not anguish
over it.  What is done is done and now is NOW.  Awful things happen to
people all the time, something awful happened to you -- but you can
still live and enjoy life and the time may come where you can share
all that with your children. That is great.

Unfortunately, there is no magic bullet to help in Court, for you have
no right to be a parent to your own children.  There is a "checklist"
for NonViolent action at the site,
http://www.AKidsRight.Org/checklist.htm -- perhaps you will find
relief there?

--- From:  "tp4pc" <tp4pc@sympatico.ca>

> Dear Ladies and Gentlemen of Despair,

> We have read some of the information, on your Website.  Maybe we
> didn't read enough.  Maybe we just don't get it???  Maybe you could
> enlighten u!.  Then again, maybe you are just Capitalist Pigs,
> wallowing in the profits, to be made from the misery of others.  Leave
> it to some American, to figure out a way of making a profit from the
> misery of others...

> What we do not understand, is the motivation behind Mr. Murtari.  What
> motivates him to endorse your firm, on the internet.  What motivates
> him to advertise your company, to people who are desperately seeking
> answers and help, for so many ills, that are plaguing our society,
> today...

> I've discussed this matter with the rest of, THE COMMITTEE , and there
> wasn't much discussion.  It seems there was immediate and unanimous
> consent, among us, that each one of us would not think about what you
> propose, in your scenario; we would merely jump in front of the bullet
> and do whatever thinking there was to be done, later, if possible.

> This reminds us of a related story... of the woman, seeing her child
> trapped beneath the wheel, of a truck, reaches for the bumper and
> lifts the truck, then pulls her child to safety.  Scientists refer to
> this as the, "adrenaline rush".  We refer to it as acting without
> thinking...

>Respectfully, Carolynn J. Middleton BABSc (Executive Secretary)

6. Father ONLY custody - the other extreme!
-------------------------------------------

--- From: Dom Tringale <whitewaterer@yahoo.com>

> I agree with Victor, but . . . telling people they are essentially
> stupid isn't going to win this war.  We have to stick together and
> educate and persuade eachother and not alienate each other. Joint
> custody is not the preferred method for raising children.

> In a divorce, sole custody to the father has the statistical support
> showing it is the best alternative if we fathers only have the courage
> to cite these statistics.  Mothers abuse the concept of joint custody
> frequently use the kids as pawns to get money in the divorce system
> not caring too much how the children turn out.  Men seem to care more
> about the finished product. 

I have one question about quoting science and statistics.  If the
statistics and science PROVED that in 90% of the cases custody with mom
was the best -- I assume all you fathers "science" people would just
close up shop -- you lost your case?  But I think a lot of us are about
"rights" -- obviously when the Declaration of Independence says "all men are
created equal" -- that is scientific garbage.  NO two people are
"equal."  But I think we all understand that we should be equal in
opportunity and if you are people of Faith, we are all loved equally by
our creator.

I believe I have a "right" to be an equal parent to my child and it
doesn't matter if the other 90% of you are dirt-balls.  I have had an
abundant chance to spend time in jail holding cells and meet the folks
just picked up the cops.  Well, I can tell you that over 90% of them are
guilty -- do we dispense with the formality/expense of a trial?  Isn't
that a benefit to keep these dangerous people off the street.

But freedom is a great "right", taking it away is NOT a matter or
science or public policy.  Your right to freedom was given to YOU by
your creator, not by the US Government or the State of Alabama.  In that
same way, maybe it is time for us to realize that the "right" to nurture
and participate in the lives of our own children is also a "right" --
deserving of those same protections?

> We fathers have to show society that we know what's best for our
> children. When we get full custody of our children, we should allow
> them to talk and visit with their mothers. Unless there is abuse, this
> is the best thing for them. We know better than any a-hole judge what's
> good for our own kids.

---------------------------------

                                         Webmaster
___________________________________________________________________
Member                                   webmaster@AKidsRight.Org
                                         http://www.AKidsRight.org/

=======================================
Newsletter mailing list
Newsletter@kids-right.org  subscribe/unsubscribe info below:
http://kids-right.org/mailman/listinfo/newsletter