Between 2006-2011, more than 6500 children of foreign birth, travelling on foreign documents with their parents, were directed to be removed from their parents and taken into Local Authority care in England and Wales in closed proceedings. Many were forcibly removed at birth. Some were forcibly adopted. Some Local Authorities admit (it’s all in the public domain) to taking over 1,000 children each. There may be thirty and more State employees involved in any one case. None of them take a second to consider their legal obligation to inform the child’s consulate of what is occurring. In fact, only one Local Authority out of all that we asked even considered (and in fact followed the Law to the letter) international obligations. The Law & Convention (Vienna Convention on Consular Relations 1963), regarding children taken into state care, which has been ratified across the Globe, is that: ANY STATE AGENCY or OFFICIAL including: FCO, Police Constables, Local Authority Social Workers, Local Legal Departments, CAFCASS, & JUDGES have an absolute Duty to inform or see that Consular Offices are informed and to enable Consular access WITH COPIES OF CASE FILES so that rights and obligations are protected. The Duty is ignored, with the active collaboration of senior officials. The police refuse to investigate. Members of Parliament refuse to get involved. The Foreign and Commonwealth Office refuse to get involved because they haven’t been contacted by the Local Authorities. OFSTED regulators measure and reward care performance, but not compliance with the Law. They refuse to act on complaints of malpractice. As does the HCPC.
Most of the cases I have seen involving child removal involve the use of rhetoric, “sexed up” discourse, to imply harm, which when independently forensically analysed the risks to the child appear as nothing. Many involve criminal offences by local authorities. Thresholds for removal are judged to be breaches of the Welfare Checklist. However, forensic experts universally condemn the Best Interests of the Child Standard for being indefinite and vague. One of the more common thresholds deemed to have been met for removal of children is “risk of future emotional harm.” Effectively guilt of some future event but in any case there is no definition in law as to what constitutes the thresholds for such emotional harm, historic or future, it is nebulous and a moving goal post that parents are unable to defend against. I have yet to see any crystal ball readouts.
Where any of these 6,500 children were adopted, they will have been illegally ‘rendered:’ – lost their nationality and effectively been disappeared from their own country and right to protection by their own country’s authorities. – (It is not the case that all these children are or that the majority of these 6,500 children are refugees seeking protection in the UK, most are residents or even visitors).
No official agency, political party or NGO, such as Children in Need, NSPCC, Liberty or Amnesty are addressing any of these issues, meaning parents and children subject to closed evidence care proceedings are effectively abandoned. The British Government seems complicit in what may effectively be a trade in children by being unable to counter or have any Parliamentary process to investigate the institution of state child care: In 2006 Cabinet Minister Harriet Harman said parliamentary accountability for the family courts is wholly theoretical while the system remains closed & because of it they have to “legislate in the dark.” She lamented that whilst she regularly attends other courts, she is not allowed to visit family courts.
Buried in a corner of the Children Act 1989 is a curious sentence the meaning of which has yet to be determined. It is a simple sentence yet its very succinctness abruptly renders obsoletes the very point of being a father. The sentence reads:
It's a fucklot easier to trademark a logo or device (think twin golden arches, the swoosh, the bite, the four colour wavy-pane*) than it is a word. Those devices are immediately recognisable just from their descriptions. I have two: Blind Lady Justice In A Box, which I used for my civil advocacy, and my old DWE device I used for a line of public domain video collections on DVD. Both of which I have successfully defended in court.
*In case you missed the references: McDonald's, Nike, Apple, Windows
sexual violence against children is violence, and when it's carried out under colour of Law by agents of State, too fucking right it falls within their remit. Truth of it is, they REFUSE to go against their biggest donor - the BRITISH GOVERNMENT - over something which could see this septic isle glassed.
(and no, that is not a typo. This place is toxic).
funny that, in my high school Home class there were probably two couples some thought might have been an item. Not only did they end up getting married, so did three other couples. All in the same class.
...and I went to the same kindergarten as my wife. Only recently discovered a photo that proves it. (!)
Dear Dice, fix your fucking edit box. I've had to use fucking [br] tags! AND WHEN ARE WE GETTING UNICODE SUPPORT!?
They don't want to know about State-sanctioned international child trafficking and systemic child sexual abuse - IN ENGLAND, but the SECOND the camera gets turned on them they get fucking pissy!? Fuck off!
I used to use MSO2k3, which did not support ODF out of the box - needed the ODF Translator Add-In. Still wouldn't support the OASIS database. Spreadsheet support was spotty. Word would read.ODT but couldn't save to it. It would try and default to.DOCX. I do know that for the past several years (at least since Office 2007) MSO has had native support for ISO/IEC 26300 v1.1 which is the full OASIS.ODF standard. I don't know if native support for.ODF 1.2 is fully implemented yet, even though it's only been a fully ratified international standard for all of a month.
they don't have to be experts, they have people inside the industry to agree on specifications then they draft them according to that agreement. That some (most?) of the ISO specifications are such abortions of common sense is not their fault, but the fault of corporate interests who can't agree for the sake of advancing operability for all rather than choking innovation for the sake of a quick profit.
In England, an underage male having sex with an underage female would be up for statutory rape. A woman having carnal knowledge of an underage male would be up for child abuse but not statutory rape. Section 5(1) of the Criminal Law Amendment Act 1885 provides for carnal knowledge of a girl under the age of 16 but the same Act does not provide for carnal knowledge of a male of any age (because Victoria didn't believe that a: homosexuality was normal hence any carnal knowledge of a male was right out, and b: that two girls having carnal knowledge of each other was even possible. This might look tangential to the point but it is very much on being as homosexuality is covered in the same Act).
That's only true of currencies like the US Dollar, the Euro and the Pound Sterling. These are debt notes, backed on themselves and issued on book entries by privately owned banks. The RMB or the Yuan are credit notes issued by a State-owned bank (the People's Bank of China) and backed on the total domestic output of the country. They're only pegged on a pool of foreign currencies including the USD and Sterling for the purposes of international trade.
a. absolutely they are, as much as Michael Bay's dross is. Pornography is legal. Images depicting scenes of child abuse, AKA kiddie porn, is anything but pornographic. I'm fucking sick of people referring to such imagery as "porn". IT'S CHILD ABUSE. b. define "questionable" without being clickbaity c. This is a restatement of the Washington district judge from last January who dismissed a slew of John Doe suits based on IPs since Doe suits are illegal anyway. d. misidentification or lack of identification? Make up your fucking mind. e. Maybe they don't have specific evidence pointing to an individual but chances are they do have evidence of infringement. See a. f. this is what civil litigation is for. What would the judge suggest, sending the boys round?
I had instant buyer's remorse when I bought my Toshiba. It has a 15.6" panel at 1366x768 and came with 6GB RAM, I could've gone with the one next to it which (OK it was an HP and I'm still not keen on HP having been inside MANY of them fixing mechanical failures) had a 19" screen, a Core i5 dual core and 3GB RAM, but for some strange reason I went for smaller screen, slower processor, more RAM and larger hard drive off the shelf...
I swear I saw a Sony 23" laptop in John Lewis not many years ago... the screen was OK resolution (1680x1200 or some weirdness I think), but the rest of it was complete shit. 1st Gen Core Duo, 2GB RAM, 250GB HD, DVD burner. Did not impress me for six grand.
Dell did the C- and L-400 series (clamshell (3.6lb) and superflat (3.5lb)) subnotes, they did extremely well. I'm looking to buy a new keyboard for my C400 since the battery still lasts five hours per charge, and for the L400 a new battery because everything else still works. I'm not abandoning my Asus netbook though, the Dells are actually better for live audio capture.
you think I kid. Try it. I did a throwaway one a while back just to see what'd happen, in less than a day I'd had offers of free money from Nigerian princes, claims that people were making $7,000 a month from their kitchen table, and even marriage proposals from lonely Russian brides.
Now, out of all that spam, if just ONE of those work-from-home things was genuine, out of all the THOUSANDS that're floating around just on Facebook, I'd've been set.
If you decide to try it and get lucky, please let the rest of us know.
Slashdot Mirror
Between 2006-2011, more than 6500 children of foreign birth, travelling on foreign documents with their parents, were directed to be removed from their parents and taken into Local Authority care in England and Wales in closed proceedings. Many were forcibly removed at birth.
Some were forcibly adopted.
Some Local Authorities admit (it’s all in the public domain) to taking over 1,000 children each.
There may be thirty and more State employees involved in any one case. None of them take a second to consider their legal obligation to inform the child’s consulate of what is occurring. In fact, only one Local Authority out of all that we asked even considered (and in fact followed the Law to the letter) international obligations.
The Law & Convention (Vienna Convention on Consular Relations 1963), regarding children taken into state care, which has been ratified across the Globe, is that: ANY STATE AGENCY or OFFICIAL including: FCO, Police Constables, Local Authority Social Workers, Local Legal Departments, CAFCASS, & JUDGES have an absolute Duty to inform or see that Consular Offices are informed and to enable Consular access WITH COPIES OF CASE FILES so that rights and obligations are protected. The Duty is ignored, with the active collaboration of senior officials.
The police refuse to investigate.
Members of Parliament refuse to get involved.
The Foreign and Commonwealth Office refuse to get involved because they haven’t been contacted by the Local Authorities.
OFSTED regulators measure and reward care performance, but not compliance with the Law. They refuse to act on complaints of malpractice. As does the HCPC.
Most of the cases I have seen involving child removal involve the use of rhetoric, “sexed up” discourse, to imply harm, which when independently forensically analysed the risks to the child appear as nothing. Many involve criminal offences by local authorities.
Thresholds for removal are judged to be breaches of the Welfare Checklist. However, forensic experts universally condemn the Best Interests of the Child Standard for being indefinite and vague. One of the more common thresholds deemed to have been met for removal of children is “risk of future emotional harm.” Effectively guilt of some future event but in any case there is no definition in law as to what constitutes the thresholds for such emotional harm, historic or future, it is nebulous and a moving goal post that parents are unable to defend against. I have yet to see any crystal ball readouts.
Where any of these 6,500 children were adopted, they will have been illegally ‘rendered:’
– lost their nationality and effectively been disappeared from their own country and right to protection by their own country’s authorities.
– (It is not the case that all these children are or that the majority of these 6,500 children are refugees seeking protection in the UK, most are residents or even visitors).
No official agency, political party or NGO, such as Children in Need, NSPCC, Liberty or Amnesty are addressing any of these issues, meaning parents and children subject to closed evidence care proceedings are effectively abandoned. The British Government seems complicit in what may effectively be a trade in children by being unable to counter or have any Parliamentary process to investigate the institution of state child care :
In 2006 Cabinet Minister Harriet Harman said parliamentary accountability for the family courts is wholly theoretical while the system remains closed & because of it they have to “legislate in the dark.” She lamented that whilst she regularly attends other courts, she is not allowed to visit family courts.
Buried in a corner of the Children Act 1989 is a curious sentence the meaning of which has yet to be determined. It is a simple sentence yet its very succinctness abruptly renders obsoletes the very point of being a father. The sentence reads:
“The rule of law that a f
we're a good match for leftovers, clearly. Fifteen and a half years and counting.
It's a fucklot easier to trademark a logo or device (think twin golden arches, the swoosh, the bite, the four colour wavy-pane*) than it is a word. Those devices are immediately recognisable just from their descriptions.
I have two: Blind Lady Justice In A Box, which I used for my civil advocacy, and my old DWE device I used for a line of public domain video collections on DVD. Both of which I have successfully defended in court.
*In case you missed the references: McDonald's, Nike, Apple, Windows
clickwrap agreements are illegal in England. It's called coercive contracting and is one half step away from racketeering.
(I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer. Retain the services of one in your own jurisdiction).
sexual violence against children is violence, and when it's carried out under colour of Law by agents of State, too fucking right it falls within their remit. Truth of it is, they REFUSE to go against their biggest donor - the BRITISH GOVERNMENT - over something which could see this septic isle glassed.
(and no, that is not a typo. This place is toxic).
hey, ever heard of DADT?
Ally McBeal? Nope. She dated other lawyers... oh, and a doctor.
Take your pick of LA Law characters. I don't think any of the major characters dated a cop.
funny that, in my high school Home class there were probably two couples some thought might have been an item. Not only did they end up getting married, so did three other couples. All in the same class.
...and I went to the same kindergarten as my wife. Only recently discovered a photo that proves it. (!)
Dear Dice, fix your fucking edit box. I've had to use fucking [br] tags! AND WHEN ARE WE GETTING UNICODE SUPPORT!?
My wife's a nurse, I'm a mechanical engineer.
How does that work into the study?
They don't want to know about State-sanctioned international child trafficking and systemic child sexual abuse - IN ENGLAND, but the SECOND the camera gets turned on them they get fucking pissy!? Fuck off!
uh... bollocks?
Really, you're blathering schyte. OO/o has had the facility to drag/drop embedded content for YEARS.
I used to use MSO2k3, which did not support ODF out of the box - needed the ODF Translator Add-In. Still wouldn't support the OASIS database. Spreadsheet support was spotty. Word would read .ODT but couldn't save to it. It would try and default to .DOCX. I do know that for the past several years (at least since Office 2007) MSO has had native support for ISO/IEC 26300 v1.1 which is the full OASIS .ODF standard. I don't know if native support for .ODF 1.2 is fully implemented yet, even though it's only been a fully ratified international standard for all of a month.
they don't have to be experts, they have people inside the industry to agree on specifications then they draft them according to that agreement. That some (most?) of the ISO specifications are such abortions of common sense is not their fault, but the fault of corporate interests who can't agree for the sake of advancing operability for all rather than choking innovation for the sake of a quick profit.
Billy Birmingham quote for the win!
BZZT! Want to try again?
In England, an underage male having sex with an underage female would be up for statutory rape. A woman having carnal knowledge of an underage male would be up for child abuse but not statutory rape. Section 5(1) of the Criminal Law Amendment Act 1885 provides for carnal knowledge of a girl under the age of 16 but the same Act does not provide for carnal knowledge of a male of any age (because Victoria didn't believe that a: homosexuality was normal hence any carnal knowledge of a male was right out, and b: that two girls having carnal knowledge of each other was even possible. This might look tangential to the point but it is very much on being as homosexuality is covered in the same Act).
That's only true of currencies like the US Dollar, the Euro and the Pound Sterling. These are debt notes, backed on themselves and issued on book entries by privately owned banks. The RMB or the Yuan are credit notes issued by a State-owned bank (the People's Bank of China) and backed on the total domestic output of the country. They're only pegged on a pool of foreign currencies including the USD and Sterling for the purposes of international trade.
nìng wéi tàipíng qun, mò zuò luànshì rén.
"Better to be a dog in a peaceful time, than to be a man in a chaotic period."
(Shapiro, Yale Book of Quotations)
dumb question, what portion of China's GDP would be enough to satisfy the bank debt?
(I'll bet it's way more than 1.0)
a. absolutely they are, as much as Michael Bay's dross is. Pornography is legal. Images depicting scenes of child abuse, AKA kiddie porn, is anything but pornographic. I'm fucking sick of people referring to such imagery as "porn". IT'S CHILD ABUSE.
b. define "questionable" without being clickbaity
c. This is a restatement of the Washington district judge from last January who dismissed a slew of John Doe suits based on IPs since Doe suits are illegal anyway.
d. misidentification or lack of identification? Make up your fucking mind.
e. Maybe they don't have specific evidence pointing to an individual but chances are they do have evidence of infringement. See a.
f. this is what civil litigation is for. What would the judge suggest, sending the boys round?
Excellent.
I had instant buyer's remorse when I bought my Toshiba. It has a 15.6" panel at 1366x768 and came with 6GB RAM, I could've gone with the one next to it which (OK it was an HP and I'm still not keen on HP having been inside MANY of them fixing mechanical failures) had a 19" screen, a Core i5 dual core and 3GB RAM, but for some strange reason I went for smaller screen, slower processor, more RAM and larger hard drive off the shelf...
I swear I saw a Sony 23" laptop in John Lewis not many years ago... the screen was OK resolution (1680x1200 or some weirdness I think), but the rest of it was complete shit. 1st Gen Core Duo, 2GB RAM, 250GB HD, DVD burner. Did not impress me for six grand.
Dell did the C- and L-400 series (clamshell (3.6lb) and superflat (3.5lb)) subnotes, they did extremely well. I'm looking to buy a new keyboard for my C400 since the battery still lasts five hours per charge, and for the L400 a new battery because everything else still works. I'm not abandoning my Asus netbook though, the Dells are actually better for live audio capture.
the F1 GTR is a road car.
you think I kid. Try it. I did a throwaway one a while back just to see what'd happen, in less than a day I'd had offers of free money from Nigerian princes, claims that people were making $7,000 a month from their kitchen table, and even marriage proposals from lonely Russian brides.
Now, out of all that spam, if just ONE of those work-from-home things was genuine, out of all the THOUSANDS that're floating around just on Facebook, I'd've been set.
If you decide to try it and get lucky, please let the rest of us know.