Fornits
Treatment Abuse, Behavior Modification, Thought Reform => The Troubled Teen Industry => Topic started by: Anonymous on June 19, 2004, 01:45:00 AM
-
My Grand Daughter was sent to a place called Casa by the sea in Mexico by her parents. I'm currently trying to get her home. This boot camp is run by World Wide Association of Specialty Programs. I need help! I would appreciate anything or any information that could help get this ugly organization put out of business. Contact: autumn@gbncentral.com
JOHNNIE WILLIAMS
-
Contact ISAC (www.isaccorp.com (http://www.isaccorp.com)). They can give you more information about WWASP, and may be able to help you get your granddaughter out of there.
-
Be careful. They hate having bad media about them, often try to get partial custody of the child - and if you pull out your kid you BETTER keep paying else you get used for not fulfilling contracutal obligations.
Plus they'll make up a billion lies to keep her in there.
Also, try to avoid a possible slander suit. They have the money to do such things. Your best bet is trying to un-brainwash their parents and point out how they controll ALL information going in and out, tell them not to believe her - and none of you know whats REALLY going on to your child/grandchild, do you?
And, naturally, here you'll prolly find someone *almost assuredly an anon* tell you we're all just liars (telling the same lie for like... oh... 20 years, and we're toally unrelated except for the same kind of program) and kids need to get humiliatd and beaten and trained into little stepford-wife like automatons. *sigh*
Good luck with trying to save your kid. Look into ISAC, and online there are several links to what really goes on, and how they work. A website thats investigating these programs that I found, http://www.askquestions.org/details.php?id=209 (http://www.askquestions.org/details.php?id=209) , has a wealth of information about this. You might want to consider emailing the editors there.
Good luck, and god speed! You're saving your daughter! Evil can only succeed if good men do nothing.
-
"Horror at Casa by the Sea".
http://www.libertarianrock.com/topics/t ... story.html (http://www.libertarianrock.com/topics/teencamps/casa-by-the-sea-story.html)
Sorry to be so adrupt about this, but this very well might be happening to your grandchild.
:cry:
-
If she's not been in long then the parents haven't either and you may be able to reason with them.
Gather your info and invite them over for dinner and present your case.
ISAC had tons of detailed and documented info.
Also you might want to check out a few other sites:
Very well done series on the wwasp programs.
http://denver.rockymountainnews.com/des ... t-pg.shtml (http://denver.rockymountainnews.com/desperate/site-desperate/day2/2front-pg.shtml)
Artical on Mind control. The parents should see this Before attending Discovery.
http://www.csj.org/studyindex/studymind ... lifton.htm (http://www.csj.org/studyindex/studymindctr/study_mindctr_lifton.htm)
Open board for comment on various wwasp programs. A bit disorganised; but worth looking over. There are some post from Casa students.
http://www.voy.com/58570/ (http://www.voy.com/58570/)
Site with some eye opening articals. Be sure to Read the parents account of Discovery.
http://www.intrepidnetreporters.com/Tee ... nhelp.html (http://www.intrepidnetreporters.com/TeenHelp/teenhelp.html)
A Casa student's web site on the realities as he experainced them.
http://abundantdomain.com/wwasp/omg.htm (http://abundantdomain.com/wwasp/omg.htm)
Costa Rican news paper. Do a search on Dundee Ranch.
http://www.ticotimes.net/contact_us.htm (http://www.ticotimes.net/contact_us.htm)
The New York Times ran a front page stroy on Casa last year. You ought to look it up as well. ISAC may have it posted. . .
Good Luck.
-
A Casa student's web site on the realities as he experainced them.
http://abundantdomain.com/wwasp/omg.htm (http://abundantdomain.com/wwasp/omg.htm)[/]
Uh oh, do I see a quasi-referral to a certain faith-based program, here? Karen???
-
A Casa student's web site on the realities as he experainced them.
http://abundantdomain.com/wwasp/omg.htm (http://abundantdomain.com/wwasp/omg.htm)
Uh oh, do I see a quasi-referral to a certain faith-based program, here? Karen???
-
Please don't try and make this about KZ.
The site is about Casa by the Sea and the program they operate. It has nothing to do with anything else.
-
On 2004-06-19 09:56:00, Anonymous wrote:
"Please don't try and make this about KZ.
The site is about Casa by the Sea and the program they operate. It has nothing to do with anything else. "
Gotcha! :wink:
-
On 2004-06-18 22:45:00, Anonymous wrote:
"My Grand Daughter was sent to a place called Casa by the sea in Mexico by her parents. I'm currently trying to get her home. This boot camp is run by World Wide Association of Specialty Programs. I need help! I would appreciate anything or any information that could help get this ugly organization put out of business. Contact: autumn@gbncentral.com
JOHNNIE WILLIAMS
"
Is your granddaughter 14 or older, and was she taken against her will?
If so, you may be able to contact your Congressman and get help getting contact to go down to Mexico and go out there with the ambassador and ask her if she wants to be repatriated to the US.
Children 14 or older have certain rights to be repatriated or not leave the country under certain conditions, even against their parents' wishes.
Contact an attorney for help with this, and have him/her check the law.
Also, if she's over 14 and they took her out of the US against her will, you may be able to parlay that into something seeking custody---especially if she'll tell a Court she wants to live with you instead of the parents.
You may be able to file a writ of Habeas Corpus with the Court and use it to make them produce her to hear what she wants. It sounds odd, but some relatives have done this successfully.
Definitely do contact ISAC.
What I've heard about the situation at Casa would lead me to think that any child there could fairly be described as in immediate danger, and you don't want to let the grass grow under your feet on this.
When I talked to ISAC about someone else they said that the trick with a habeas corpus filing is you only get one shot and everything hs to be done exactly right.
Timoclea
-
Your Grand daughter may be in grave danger. Reports from survivors of Casa have been shocking. Do your research - and show these things to her parents. There was a 60 minutes presentation regarding this place and the experience of a 15-year old boy, Ryan Friedenburg(sp). You need to see this video - I'm not sure where it is found - but it is on-line. One of the reasons WWASP has taken their programs out-of the country is to continue with their extremely abusive behavior modification techniques without the laws of the USA interfering. I believe Mexico has signed the treaty against cruel, inhumane and degrading treatment.
Best Wishes to you- A democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner.
- A republic is where the sheep get to pick which wolves vote on what to have for dinner.
- But in a constitutional republic, voting on dinner is strictly
forbidden.
--A Patriot
-
From: WWASP VICTIM (@ 12-246-124-72.client.attbi.com) on: Mon Jun 2 16:40:34 EDT 2003
I spent 5 months at casa by the sea, was physicallt beatin, and mentally destroyed. My parents were ripped off and were taken advatage of in a time of crisis. I was kidnapped, taken to mexico, and held for ransom for 5 months. Wwasp is a complete money scandal. The more kids they got, the more money comes in. The goal is to make the owner rich, sadly not to care for your kid. Go to ur local zoo, they treat the animals better there then wwasp facility's. Never once for 5 months i wasnt alloud to talk on the phone with my parents. Dundee ranch, one of wwasp facilty's, was just shut down 2 weeks ago and the owner was arrested and was detained in a costa rican jail for charges of abuse, and several other charges. Wwasp is known for its false advertisement and money grubbin scandal. The kids are not students, they are inmates. The united states treated convicted murders high class compared to what they treated me like. Several wwasp programs have been shut down for physical abuse. "paradise cove" was shut down cause they used cattle prods on kids. (sounds like paradise) Sunrise beach in mexico was shut down physical abuse, the owner fled mexico. High impact was shut down cause officals found kids in dogg cages. And now DUNDEE RANCH was just shut down for 4 different charges of abuse, dundee was raided by poilce and made the arrest of the owener. wwasp makes 65 million a year, if they want to help ur child so much why do the parents have to mortgage there homes? Take it from me, i was at casa by the sea for 5 months and am still affected by the torture they did to me. Hundreds of legal suits have been filed recently against wwasp. I personally was on the fron page of the NEW YORK TIMES less then 2 weeks ago. Several former owners admitted they had abused kids and would lock kids in isolation rooms days on end. If you are interested in truth, then you will surely be interested in the torture wwasp puts your kid through. This is one of those places that you would never imagine and would never be able to visualize. Cant speak your own language, cannot talk or see oppisite sexs, cannot talk with ur parents for years, cannot speak when u want, cannot talk to others, eat horrible food, watched by staff when you are goin to the bathroom, taking a shower. The amount of money these people are giving to wwasp, i feel they outta have there kids treated like kings and queens. Take that money and put it right back in your pocket, there are people who will REALY help you without making you morgage your home and hold ur kid in a different country for ransom. Girls have been raped at wwasp prisons. And we will never forget the young boy who died from the rotation of his neck that snapped from the adminstrator. WWASP sure has a bad reputation and is all falling down. These teens are people just like them, we have rights as a human being and we were stripped of our dignity, and treated like doggs in cages. WWASP has alot to hide and i dont know if the truth could be any more obvious. For some reason, thousands of other teens like me have been destroyed from wwasp. We kids have no reason to lie to anyone, but the pain we have been through is to much and we are willing to take some time and let anyone know what these people are realy about. The first day i was there, i spent 73 hours in casa's R & R chamber isolation room with my nose to the floor, and hands behind my back days on end, with only a couple 1 min bathroom breaks. The advertisement of wwasp makes me laugh. I find it incredibly humorous and sickening. Wow, you would almost have to be stupid to pay for your own kid to be kidnapped,taken abroad, and even pay for his abuse and torture while not even being able to talk to you on the phone for years. You would like to think you get what you pay for right? Well let me be me to assure you the money doesnt go into your childs well being. Your child is sleeping on a cement floor with 90 other kids in a hallway every night being watched by jo blo. Its very simple, your money doesnt go to your kid, It goes directly into the hands of the owner of wwasp. You arent buyin ur kid anything, you are paying for the owner's nice homes, sports cars, and expensive dinners, while your kid is in a different country rotting like an orphan. Your heart is in denial and somewhere deep down you fear the worst, well i guess its god's turn to let you know this is the worst. By being involved with wwasp, you are supporting kidnaps, rape, abuse, neglect, starvation, and ransom of your kid. All wwasp victims legally cannot be held against there will. Wwasp violates human rights in several countries. You are hurting your kid way more then helping. It realy is likely he wont forget the torture but you can start by buyin a plane ticket and capturing you son or daughter. May god bless you and thank you for letting me share with you my honest heart.
From: Kim (@ 0-1pool180-183.nas2.las-vegas1.nv.us.da.qwest.net) on: Mon Jul 28 23:05:12 EDT 2003
I recently left a program in mexico. Some things they say are true, and others I am not so certain about- I never saw them. If you were compliant you could get so far. If you were rebellious, well, there were some extremeties. People often ask me what it was like and its hard for me to explain. I seem to have shut most of that experience out of my mind. I do know that it was very hard. Emotionally and physically. And everyone has different views on it. I left because I developed pneumonia, a weird bacteria called MAI, and had an abcess in my lung no smaller than a lemon. I do beleive it was from neglect. After several weeks of being really sick, doubting myself because no one really beleived me, I decided to keep persisting to see a real doctor. And I did. That day was the last day I ever saw that school. When I was sick, I was in a lot of pain. And to get one tylenol or ibuprofen there was like trying to get some illegal drug. well, theres more. I dont want to bore you. I am glad about one thing, I finished highschool there. Whether going there helped me as a person, I'm not sure. Maybe I just needed to get out of the environment I was in. Such drastic measures such as sending me away for nine months probably werent necessary. Maybe I just needed to grow up. If you have any questions or comments, feel free to e-mail me. id love to find out about other peoples views or experiences.
From: Donna (@ wcshqs1.ncr.disa.mil) on: Fri Apr 2 11:12:30 EST 2004
Just to let you know that these WWASP stories above are not true. There are elements of truth, but they are so blown out of proportion that they have gone over the edge of being ridiculous.
If you look on other websites (wwasprebuttal.com -- I think is one --even intrepidnetreporter), you will find hundreds of parents and teens who have received good results from these programs. Not one lawsuit--EVER--has succeeded against WWASP for good reason. They do really good work.
My daughter was in a WWASP facility, Casa by the Sea, for 23 months. She went in extremely self destructive at 14, using drugs, alcohol, having sex, cutting herself, suicidal ideation, and through WWASP has done very well for herself. She's been out for 13 months, just had her 18 birthday, and is about to graduate from high school with her class. She intends to go to college. This wouldn't have happened without WWASP. She would have been dead or almost certainly dropped out.
Was WWASP perfect? No--far from it. But it did the job, and now I have a fairly normal (well, as normal as teens are) young woman who is capable of making good, non-self-destructive choices. She IS NOT bitter about WWASP at all
Note from poster: this parent was not there - but apparenty liked the end result - a compliant and obedient child. Some people think it's worth it pay someone to literraly BEAT THE HELL out of their defiant teen. I'm not one of those people. Sometime people need to learn hard lesson of life the hard way and sometimes a good parent can only advise and watch as their child makes mistakes that they will hopefully learn from.
[ This Message was edited by: cherish wisdom on 2004-06-19 20:24 ]
-
Has the grandfather made any progress? Another avenue to pursue is to contact the US Embassy and ask them to do a welfare check *under the privacy act*. If I am not mistaken, the grandfather could specify that the child be told of his grandfather's concerns for his safety and well-being. After that, it is up to the child to decide if he wants to waive his rights under the privacy act but if he does, than this gives the US Embassy the authority to communicate his (the teens's) thoughts and feelings to interested parties, such as his grandfather.
-
On 2004-06-21 20:25:00, Anonymous wrote:
"Has the grandfather made any progress? Another avenue to pursue is to contact the US Embassy and ask them to do a welfare check *under the privacy act*. If I am not mistaken, the grandfather could specify that the child be told of his grandfather's concerns for his safety and well-being. After that, it is up to the child to decide if he wants to waive his rights under the privacy act but if he does, than this gives the US Embassy the authority to communicate his (the teens's) thoughts and feelings to interested parties, such as his grandfather.
"
Having personal experience as a grandparent trying to communicate with a child shipped to Casa by the Sea, I can absolutely state that the US Consular authorities (Al Anzaldua, Tijuana Embassy) definitely will not allow the American citizen child contact with the outside world against WWASPS wishes. Anzaldua is in the back pocket of Dace Goulding, director of Casa, sees no harm in incarcerating children for years and years of silence, refuses to follow US law requiring citizens to be advised of their rights of repatriation, and will not even do an American citizen welfare check to affirm that the child in question is even still alive in the Ensenada facility.
Having laws in place to protect our citizens overseas is a nice and tidy format to make legislators feel better. Real world is that those laws are not enforced, and the State Department (up to Colin Powell and down through the ranks to the local king/God in his little fiefdom far away from the States) does not want to enter into this dirty business. Ask anybody who has pleaded for help with Tranquility Bay kids. The consulate in Jamaica and the Western Hemisphere State Department heads are notoriously corrupt and refuse to even investigate.
FWIW, as a grandparent formerly in this man's same position, I have personally emailed him and have not received an answer.
-
On 2004-06-21 22:08:00, Anonymous wrote:
"
On 2004-06-21 20:25:00, Anonymous wrote:
"Has the grandfather made any progress? Another avenue to pursue is to contact the US Embassy and ask them to do a welfare check *under the privacy act*. If I am not mistaken, the grandfather could specify that the child be told of his grandfather's concerns for his safety and well-being. After that, it is up to the child to decide if he wants to waive his rights under the privacy act but if he does, than this gives the US Embassy the authority to communicate his (the teens's) thoughts and feelings to interested parties, such as his grandfather.
"
Having personal experience as a grandparent trying to communicate with a child shipped to Casa by the Sea, I can absolutely state that the US Consular authorities (Al Anzaldua, Tijuana Embassy) definitely will not allow the American citizen child contact with the outside world against WWASPS wishes. Anzaldua is in the back pocket of Dace Goulding, director of Casa, sees no harm in incarcerating children for years and years of silence, refuses to follow US law requiring citizens to be advised of their rights of repatriation, and will not even do an American citizen welfare check to affirm that the child in question is even still alive in the Ensenada facility.
Having laws in place to protect our citizens overseas is a nice and tidy format to make legislators feel better. Real world is that those laws are not enforced, and the State Department (up to Colin Powell and down through the ranks to the local king/God in his little fiefdom far away from the States) does not want to enter into this dirty business. Ask anybody who has pleaded for help with Tranquility Bay kids. The consulate in Jamaica and the Western Hemisphere State Department heads are notoriously corrupt and refuse to even investigate.
FWIW, as a grandparent formerly in this man's same position, I have personally emailed him and have not received an answer. "
Spots, if requested of them, the US Embassy MUST conduct a welfare check, they cannot refuse. See excerpt below from the DOS Behavior Modification fact sheet for further information and instructions on how to initiate a WELFARE check on a minor residing in an offshore behavior modification school or program. Everything else you say, I agree 100% with.
As excerpted:
" .... U.S. consular officials are not qualified to determine whether the programs offered by the facilities are of therapeutic benefit to the enrollees. When aware of such facilities, U.S. consular officials conduct periodic facility visits, sometimes accompanied by host country officials, to monitor the general welfare of the U.S. citizen enrollees. Inquiries into the welfare and whereabouts of U.S. citizen enrollees may be initiated by contacting the closest U.S. Embassy/Consulate in the host country or the Department of State?s Overseas Citizens Services (OCS) office at the below telephone number. Also, parents may contact the closest U.S. Embassy/Consulate in the host country to inquire about the facility or speak to the Department of State?s Bureau of Consular Affairs? OCS Specialist for that country (Tel.: 202-647-5226 or, for after hours emergencies, 202-647-5225).
The Federal Privacy Act protects U.S. citizens, including minor children, from the unauthorized disclosure of information that the U.S. Government has collected and maintained about them unless the U.S. citizen has consented in writing to the release of the information or one of the Privacy Act?s ?conditions of disclosure? permits the U.S. Government to release the otherwise protected information.
While parents/guardians may at times act in loco parentis for their minor children and obtain information that is otherwise protected by the Privacy Act, it must also be noted that minor children?s explicit wishes must be respected. Thus, a U.S. consular officer who has been advised by a minor child that s/he does not want any information released to an inquiring parent/guardian should honor those wishes absent the presence of circumstances affecting the health or safety of the minor child (i.e., one of the ?conditions of disclosure?). Parents/guardians should be aware that U.S. citizens 14 years of age and older have the right to apply for a passport without their parents?/guardian?s permission. In extreme emergency situations, they may also request repatriation assistance from the U.S. Government without parental consent.
Source: http://www.travel.state.gov/behavior_modification.html (http://www.travel.state.gov/behavior_modification.html)
-
On 2004-06-18 22:45:00, Anonymous wrote:
"My Grand Daughter was sent to a place called Casa by the sea in Mexico by her parents. I'm currently trying to get her home. This boot camp is run by World Wide Association of Specialty Programs. I need help! I would appreciate anything or any information that could help get this ugly organization put out of business. Contact: autumn@gbncentral.com
JOHNNIE WILLIAMS
"
Is this name and email address even legit?
-
Spots, if requested of them, the US Embassy MUST conduct a welfare check, they cannot refuse.
As you may know, we were not in verbal contact with our daughter, the mother who had sent our oldest grandaughter (14) off to Casa by the Sea. We had been fighting this WWASPS battle for 7 months when I found out about the State Department welfare check. I called the Washington DC office to confirm, and spoke personally to a lady who I now know to be an uppity-up who was concerned about negative WWASPS complaints and was keeping a log of who and why she was getting calls. So much for logging complaints!
I ended up in several conversations with Mexican US State Department folks, including the Ensenada attache, and his boss, the Tijuana consular officer, Al Anzaldua. Mr. A**, [we have our own nickname for him now] called me up one Saturday at our home, and spoke to me for more than an hour from Tijuana. He basically said, "Sorry, but I can't do a welfare check without permission of the custodial parent, and she has refused permission". Now, first, this is bullshit because nowhere does it say someone...relative, reporter, telemarketer...needs to have permission from a parent to check welfare. This child we were desperate to "check on" [actually, we wanted her to know we were still there, working for her freedom], had a last name different from the remarried mother. We never identified anybody to the State Department except the child and her location at Casa by the Sea. Anzaldua couldn't have known who the mother was and where she lived if he hadn't gone to Dace Goulding and explained the request he received from us, then received the mother's name, home location, and telephone number from Casa, and called for "permission". He told me he couldn't even wander around on one of his "surprise" inspections and ask for her by first name. He could only report back to me on her welfare if some girl of the appropriate age happened upon him while he was walking (with Dace, because he never "inspects" alone), mentioned that her name was ****, even though she was not allowed to talk during her 10 months there nor look anyone in the eye, nor look at or speak to a male.
No matter WHAT the law says, it just ain't gonna happen in Northern Mexico. I met with my local congressman (a totally useless GOB) who seemed appalled at the thick binder of documentation I presented, and promised to follow up on the State Department thing. During his "efforts", our grandaughter was brought home by her mother, so my fervor was diluted. What did my wonderful elected GOB do? After 6 weeks, he sent me a nifty letter with his seal, and attached was another nifty letter from the State Department saying that they'd look into it, but they were sure everything was alright. IOW, our government does nothing to guard our child-citizens abroad. Don't count on it, even if it is the law.
-
*BARF*
WHY don't these people even think "gee, these are KIDS, why don't we check on them?"
Social services goes after their own PARENTS like hitler's gestapo went after whomever...
Anyone suspected of hurting kids gets locked up for years and years.
Where is the consistency? Jesus christ why don't people in the USA care about the children of the USA?
Why don't all the left-wingers spewing pictures of crying kids saying war is bad bother to protect OUR CHILDREN?
-
On 2004-06-22 08:34:00, Anonymous wrote:
"*BARF*
WHY don't these people even think "gee, these are KIDS, why don't we check on them?"
Social services goes after their own PARENTS like hitler's gestapo went after whomever...
Anyone suspected of hurting kids gets locked up for years and years.
Where is the consistency? Jesus christ why don't people in the USA care about the children of the USA?
Why don't all the left-wingers spewing pictures of crying kids saying war is bad bother to protect OUR CHILDREN? "
I think it's because there's a Social Services bias that the "abusive parent" is an ultra-right-wing freak cross between the Scarlet Letter and Deliverance, and that "social institutions" are the force of all that is good and "progressive."
Yeah, I know a lot of these institutions give a lot of money to conservative politicians and are War On Drugs oriented---it's just that *both* major parties have a complete civil liberties blindspot regarding the WOD.
Anyway, school teachers are liberal NEA union "forces of good" and institutions for the care of misguided yout' and "drug rehab" are "forces of good" and so any stuff they do is a "necessary evil"---when if it was done by the parents directly it would clearly be seen as abusive and the kids removed.
It also doesn't help that these kids have been stigmatized and dehumanized. Nobody wants "young punks" running around loose in their neighborhood.
Basically, its the same human nature blind spot that let us put bounties on Indian Scalps in the Indian Wars after the Civil War, let us put Japanese Americans in internment camps in WWII, let us put up with Jim Crow for 100 years after the Civil War, let the Germans put up with the Concentration Camps.
Once you define a group as less than human "those people" on the road to be lifelong criminals and scoundrels and forces of evil in society---you can ignore people doing just about anything to them.
The only way to stop it is to take away the stigma and put a human face on these kids.
We have to make the public at large see these kids not as statistics or -"pathological liar juvenile delinquent druggies---they'd as soon lie to you and steal from you and manipulate you as look at you---they're *masterminds* in the Art of Deception"- but as individual human beings.
The propaganda the institutions put out about the kids sounds a hell of a lot like the propaganda the Nazis put out about the Jews or Hollywood put out about the Japanese. It's no accident.
Dehumanize the "other" and you can justify doing to him pretty much anything you want.
Timoclea
-
On 2004-06-21 23:41:00, spots wrote:
"
Spots, if requested of them, the US Embassy MUST conduct a welfare check, they cannot refuse.
As you may know, we were not in verbal contact with our daughter, the mother who had sent our oldest grandaughter (14) off to Casa by the Sea. We had been fighting this WWASPS battle for 7 months when I found out about the State Department welfare check. I called the Washington DC office to confirm, and spoke personally to a lady who I now know to be an uppity-up who was concerned about negative WWASPS complaints and was keeping a log of who and why she was getting calls. So much for logging complaints!
I ended up in several conversations with Mexican US State Department folks, including the Ensenada attache, and his boss, the Tijuana consular officer, Al Anzaldua. Mr. A**, [we have our own nickname for him now] called me up one Saturday at our home, and spoke to me for more than an hour from Tijuana. He basically said, "Sorry, but I can't do a welfare check without permission of the custodial parent, and she has refused permission". Now, first, this is bullshit because nowhere does it say someone...relative, reporter, telemarketer...needs to have permission from a parent to check welfare. This child we were desperate to "check on" [actually, we wanted her to know we were still there, working for her freedom], had a last name different from the remarried mother. We never identified anybody to the State Department except the child and her location at Casa by the Sea. Anzaldua couldn't have known who the mother was and where she lived if he hadn't gone to Dace Goulding and explained the request he received from us, then received the mother's name, home location, and telephone number from Casa, and called for "permission". He told me he couldn't even wander around on one of his "surprise" inspections and ask for her by first name. He could only report back to me on her welfare if some girl of the appropriate age happened upon him while he was walking (with Dace, because he never "inspects" alone), mentioned that her name was ****, even though she was not allowed to talk during her 10 months there nor look anyone in the eye, nor look at or speak to a male.
No matter WHAT the law says, it just ain't gonna happen in Northern Mexico. I met with my local congressman (a totally useless GOB) who seemed appalled at the thick binder of documentation I presented, and promised to follow up on the State Department thing. During his "efforts", our grandaughter was brought home by her mother, so my fervor was diluted. What did my wonderful elected GOB do? After 6 weeks, he sent me a nifty letter with his seal, and attached was another nifty letter from the State Department saying that they'd look into it, but they were sure everything was alright. IOW, our government does nothing to guard our child-citizens abroad. Don't count on it, even if it is the law.
"
Yeah, but this kind of crap---scandalous ignoring of the law, corruption---happens all the damned time in government, and how you blow a scandal up to lifesize and get it fixed, somewhat, temporarily, is you keep screaming.
The squeaky wheel gets the grease---so it's important for this grandfather to give the State Department all kinds of hassle, and badger his Congressman and Senator (all politely but firmly), and contact his local news media, and write letters to the editor, and write articles on the abuses.
Cherish Wisdom---will you please contact me. I'm a professional writer and even though I'm just a science fiction author, and a newbie one at that, if I put it on my website it will get seen.
I would like to write an article about your experience with the State Department and your Congressman trying to get the law followed regarding your daughter.
I will be out of pocket for the next week, but if you're willing, lets get in touch after that.
I've decided a big summary article on the industry like I was planning isn't going to work at first. A series of articles that put a human face on the problem will be much more effective.
Thanks,
Timoclea
-
er....your granddaughter, I mean. Brain fade. Sorry.
-
**I think it's because there's a Social Services bias that the "abusive parent" is an ultra-right-wing freak cross between the Scarlet Letter and Deliverance, and that "social institutions" are the force of all that is good and "progressive."
I love this fable by Daniel Quinn (Ishmael). Institutions just don't work because all they can do is create rules and punishments. Totally missing the real issues. Protecting Teens: Whose Business Is It?
http://ishmael.com/Education/Writings/rice_u_2_98.shtml (http://ishmael.com/Education/Writings/rice_u_2_98.shtml)
Once upon a time in a certain city it was noticed that pre-adolescent children were beginning to throw themselves off the roofs of tall buildings with alarming frequency. No one wondered for a moment whose business it was to deal with this alarming development. The city council met and quickly drafted some regulations requiring the erection of guard rails on the roofs of tall buildings. Denied this means of suicide, however, children began to throw themselves off of much lower buildings, and soon all buildings of more than three storeys were required either to install guard rails or to block access to roofs. The expense was enormous, but of course what is outgo to one person is income to another, so the economy continued to flourish as before.
Unfortunately, however, the pre-adolescent suicide rate did not decline. Instead of throwing themselves from buildings, children were now drowning themselves in the river that ran through the city. This was even more perplexing, because no one could think of any practical means of making the river inaccessible to would-be suicides. At the same time, no one wondered whose business it was to stop these drownings. The city council met and finally decided to erect watch towers every five hundred meters all along the river's edge. Unfortunately, the effect of this was merely to move the suicides from daytime hours to nighttime hours, when the watchers were blinded by darkness. Of course, it was totally out of the question to install searchlights to cover such a wide area. Instead it seemed sensible to institute a curfew for children under fifteen. So, between the watch towers manned during the day and the curfew maintained during the night, self-drowning came to an end -- but, alas, not the suicides in general. Children began to hang themselves. Civic leaders saw immediately that they needed parental cooperation to control this new development, and so initiated a massive education program to show parents how to reduce hanging opportunities in their homes and neighborhoods. Ropes were put under lock and key. Belts, ties, and suspenders vanished. Bedrooms were routinely searched for evidence of braiding projects.
As hanging opportunities declined, however, children found other opportunities in bottles, jars, and boxes in medicine cabinets, potting sheds, and garages. With these means, they succeeded in rendering themselves sick, blind, comatose, brain damaged, and indeed very often completely dead. New educational programs were put in place, and the city expanded the activities of its poison control center to include home visitations and inspections. The hospitals soon noticed a decline in pre-adolescent patients who were merely sick, blind, comatose, or brain damaged -- but a dramatic increase in those who were just plain dead by poisoning. A reporter on the local paper soon discovered the explanation. As poisons became unavailable in the home, teenage entrepreneurs began to make up the shortfall in the school environment. Not only were poisons readily available there, the market pressure of competition assured that they were of high quality, which is to say that, unlike products found randomly in the home, these were reliably lethal.
Naturally law-enforcement officials ordered a crackdown on the playground poison trade. And naturally this didn't end the trade, it just drove up prices. The incidence of crime among pre-teens soared as youngsters scrambled for funds with which to buy oblivion. Then one day an armed eleven-year-old was gunned down by law enforcement officials at a robbery site. This was a revelation for would-be suicides, for they suddenly realized that it was now much easier to find death by way of a policeman's bullet than by conventional means, which the city had gone to so much trouble to put out of reach. Overnight a fifth of all the city's pre-teens were running amok to make themselves into attractive targets of lethal force.
The city council hastily met to address the crisis. The police commissioner was on hand to demand safety for the public. The head of the police union was on hand to demand safety for law enforcement officers. The head of the controller's office was on hand to explain that there were no funds left anywhere in the budget to throw at this problem. The school superintendent wanted special patrols for classrooms and hallways. The head of the teacher's union, on the other hand, argued for an early school closing. The city attorney proposed developing an early-warning system so suicidal youngsters could be locked up for their own good. The head of the prison department informed him that the jails were already full to overflowing with would-be suicides, with a shocking number of them condemned to sleeping on the floor.
A member of the general public -- an ordinary citizen -- at last managed to gain the floor to make a statement. "Instead of spending all this time, energy, and money to prevent children from doing what they want to do," she said, "why don't we spend some of it to find out why they WANT to do it in the first place? What is IMPELLING them to self-slaughter? We need the answer to that question, and when we have it, we need to do something about it. Then we won't HAVE to patrol the river and guard the roofs and lock up our neck ties and all the rest." Well, this statement shocked the assembly into a long moment of silence. Then a wave of baffled looks and shrugs traveled round the room, and the council members resumed their former conversation at precisely the point at which it had been interrupted.
The question is: Why? Why was this upstart citizen ignored? It was because she was not going along with the idea that pre-adolescent suicide is government business. We all know what the business of government is. The business of government is making and enforcing regulations. Governments approach ALL problems as problems of making and enforcing regulations. They reduce all problems to things about which regulations can be made and enforced. This upstart citizen was trying to propose an approach to the problem that had nothing to do with regulations, and so she was ignored -- and rightly so, from the point of view of the city council.
This brings us, clearly enough, to the theme of this conference: Protecting the Environment: Whose Business Is It? Well, to answer this question, we naturally have to begin by asking what is this thing called "the environment"? You can help with this answer by taking out a moment to point to it. Does anyone here know where this thing called "the environment" is to be found? This is not a trick question. Where is "the environment"? Please help me out by pointing to it. That's right, "the environment" is something out THERE. It extends deep into the earth and high up into the sky. It encompasses trillions of cubic miles of earth, air, and water.
Now if we define our problem here as "protecting" trillions of cubic miles of earth, air, and water, whose business is it going to be? What agency could imaginably take on such a task? Or maybe it would help to describe what means could possibly be employed to protect trillions of cubic miles of earth, air, and water. I'll start with a suggestion. The only conceivable way to undertake protecting trillions of cubic miles of earth, air, and water is to MAKE REGULATIONS and ENFORCE THEM. So now guess whose business it is to "protect the environment." As far as I'm concerned, protecting the environment is a conceptually equivalent to regulating EVERYTHING. And whose business is it to regulate everything? For those of you who answered "The Government," give yourself a perfect score of one hundred.
The upstart citizen who interrupted the city council meeting refused to define the city's problem as a problem only governments can handle. And I refuse to define the problem WE face as a problem only governments can handle. It's true that only governments can realistically "protect the environment" (and those three words are in quotes). But I refuse to accept "protecting the environment" as a meaningful description of our problem. In fact, I think it's a lousy description. In fact, I think that "protecting the environment" is probably a description that was invented by a bureaucrat in order to preempt the problem and let everyone know that this is government business, and ordinary citizens should butt out.
My book Ishmael begins with a famous want ad, which reads "Teacher seeks pupil. Must have an earnest desire to save the world." The ad does NOT say "Must have an earnest desire to protect the environment."
You laugh because you see that there is simply a titanic difference between these two ways of perceiving our problem. Protecting the environment is not nearly enough. Protecting the environment is just something bureaucrats can manage. What WE want is what that upstart at the city council meeting wanted. She didn't want to make it difficult for children to kill themselves. This is something bureaucrats can manage. She wanted to keep children from wanting to kill themselves!
Our situation is the same. Personally, I am not in love with the environment. The environment is just an IT. It's a collection of STUFF, a conglomeration of physical and chemical processes. Has anyone here ever fallen in love with trillions of cubic miles of stuff? Has anyone here ever had an ecstatic experience with "the environment"? Has anyone here ever gone for a picnic in "the environment"? Has anyone here ever taken the kids out to spend an afternoon in "the environment"? No, I confidently believe that the only person who could really LOVE something called "the environment" would have to have the heart of a statute-writer.
But I do love the world. And I do have an earnest desire to save the world, and this is something I share with hundreds of thousands (and probably millions) of other people. People seem to have in common an intuitive understanding of what saving the world means. The world is our HOME. It's not just "the environment." Saving the world means our children will have a place to grow up -- and their children -- and their children. Failing to save the world means our children will grow up (or fail to grow up at all) in the land of nightmare and catastrophe.
The fable I began this talk with has a second point. What the dissident told the city council was, "Why work only to PROTECT our children from their suicidal impulses? Why not find out what's BEHIND their suicidal impulses and deal with THAT? In other words, why not deal with the CAUSE of the problem instead of perpetually dealing with its effects?"
By adopting a strategy of "protecting the environment," our leaders are adopting the same reactionary strategy as the city leaders of my fable -- but for slightly different reasons. The officials of my fable were merely stupid. Our leaders aren't stupid, they're just acting in accordance with the fundamental mythology of our culture, which represents humans as intrinsically and hopelessly destructive. This being the case, the only conceivable course for them is to (quote) "protect the environment" -- from us, of course. Who else? The environment doesn't have to be protected from shellfish or owls or rattlesnakes or elm trees. It has to be protected from those intrinsically and hopelessly destructive beings who are US. The pre-teens of my fable seemed to be impelled to self-slaughter, but it never occurred to city officials to wonder WHY. We seem to be impelled to destroy the world, and it similarly never occurs to our governmental protectors to wonder WHY. What they've learned from infancy is that humans are just NATURALLY destructive. So, for anyone under the spell of our cultural mythology, all ANYONE can do is . . . "protect the environment."
In THE STORY OF B I made the following statement: "If the world is saved, it will not be saved by old minds with new programs, it will be saved by new minds with no programs at all." With these words, I've redefined our task. Our task (if we hope to avoid extinction on this planet) is not to "protect the environment" but rather to change minds. "Protecting the environment" is not enough and will never be enough, because it is essentially reactionary, essentially defensive. It WAITS on bad things to happen. It WAITS on -- DEPENDS on -- our destructiveness. "Protecting the environment" is an invitation to develop programs, one after another, FOREVER, to combat our destructiveness -- as "Preventing suicide" in my fable was an invitation to city officials to develop programs, one after another, FOREVER, to combat their children's self-destructiveness.
"Protecting the environment" is the business of those among us who never expect to achieve more than stalemate with the forces that are rendering our planet uninhabitable. We must have more than that. Stalemate is just not good enough. And that's the very first mind-change we must make -- getting rid of the notion that "protecting the environment" is the very best we can hope for.
Protecting the environment is for bureaucrats and vote-getters. We can safely leave that in their hands to screw up in the usual fashion. But saving the world is different. Is anyone here waiting for Bill Clinton and Al Gore to save the world? No, saving the world is too important to leave to them. Saving the world is for upstarts and lovers. Saving the world is for the rest of us.
Endnote
Questions from one member of the audience compel me to append this note.
"Saving the world" is a slippery concept, to be sure. As I've pointed out elsewhere, it's not in our power to render this planet lifeless. Life as such is safe from us, so we don't need to save the world in the sense of biosphere. I've defined saving the world elsewhere as an enterprise calculated to preserve (as far as possible) the world as it is today. Of course we can't preserve the world as it is today in any literal sense, since upwards of two hundred species a day are disappearing as a direct result of our encroachment on the world's remaining wilderness. The question I received from the audience at Rice University's Environmental Conference was getting at something else that I didn't recognize until later.
Just as it's not within our power to destroy all life on this planet, it's not within our power to preserve all life on this planet exactly as it is today (or tomorrow or any other day), even if we totally ceased growing, totally ceased polluting the environment, and rolled our population back a hundred-fold or a thousand-fold. In other words, evolution is utterly beyond human control and always will be. We can't say, "We like the world exactly the way it is today" -- and then FORCE it to stay that way. To think we could do this would be utterly absurd -- and utterly arrogant. With or without us, the world of life is FOREVER changing and will never stop changing just to suit us. This being the case, what on earth can "saving the world" mean? I can only approach a definition in this way: Saving the world means ceasing to make ourselves the direct cause of mass extinctions through sheer recklessness. No matter what we do (even if we disappear entirely!), extinctions will continue to occur on this planet -- just exactly the way they always have. But they don't have to continue as a direct result of our expansion and our pollution of the environment. You might say then that "saving the world" is equivalent to "making ourselves as harmless as any other species."
The key words in that phrase are "as any other species." Anytime a new species appears, adjustments must inevitably occur in the rest of the community, and some of these adjustments may well result in extinctions. That's what evolution is all about. This isn't a measure of the species' ferocity or voraciousness. For all anyone knows, the emergence of butterflies may have resulted in a whole cascade of extinctions. In other words, "making ourselves as harmless as any other species" doesn't mean making ourselves gentle or loving or sweet-natured. Just as it's true that butterflies may have been the cause of countless extinctions, sharks may never have caused a single extinction. Please note that I'm not "changing my mind" here. Ishmael asked Alan Lomax: "Does being civilized . . . make you incapable of living as harmlessly as sharks and tarantulas and rattlesnakes?" Charles Atterley in THE STORY OF B said, "Man lived at peace with the world . . . for millions of years. This doesn't mean he was a saint. This doesn't mean he walked the earth like a Buddha. It means he lived as harmlessly as a hyena or a shark or a rattlesnake." So, to repeat: Saving the world surely doesn't mean freezing it as it is right now -- or returning it to some supposedly ideal evolutionary state (equally impossible). What it does mean is learning to live harmlessly in the world -- as harmlessly as sharks and tarantulas and rattlesnakes.
-
Timoclea, would you please provide a link to your website? Thanks!
-
I am interested in knowing of cases of alledged rape and or relationships with the councilors or administration of underage female minors. I also would like to know the names of the attorneys used to represent these groups?
Thanks in advance!
GOOGLE search me if you like "Jay Beswick" :flame:
-
Hello Jay!
I see you've found Fornits :wink:
You might want to consider getting a copy of the WWASP vs PURE trial transcripts. The attorneys are all named, naturally; and there is some testimony by Ken Kay along your lines of interest.
The transcripts are available through ISAC.
I do believe you have the link - but for your convenience:
http://www.isaccorp.org (http://www.isaccorp.org)