Child Protector Racket: Child Protectors Just "Snatch" Children

Child Protector Racket: Child Protectors Just "Snatch" Children

FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 04, 2011
Child Protectors Just "Snatch" Children

They SAY there is “evidence” of “psychological issues” they can’t detail or describe. But that didn’t stop them from just TAKING the children because they are being “home schooled." Authorities even fined the parents $5,000 for home schooling them in the past. Of course, this happened in Sweden where the laws are different. But evidence shows that our own “child protectors” operate the same way and are ALLOWED to do so. And have done so many times in the past. They CLAIM their activities are “civil,” not criminal, and thus constitutional protections don’t apply.

But that’s just a dodge that allows them to operate “extra-constitutionally” in their efforts to collect the myriad “fees” the feds give them at every point in “the process,” from the FIRST DAY after they “snatch” a child until they are either returned to their parents or adopted out. They have a very definite conflict of interest here, in that they PROFIT ($4.500 to $6,000 each) from severing parental rights and manage to adopt the children out. Meanwhile they get “fees” for every day those children are “in the system.” It is to their monetary advantage to delay the return of the children as long as they can.They collect a fee if the child is "in the system" ONE DAY. It's a simple moneymaking scam.

With my own children more than 35 years ago, they stalled and stalled, lying (having NOTHING for which to keep them) about the dates of hearings, and finally succeeding in severing my parental rights by doing so. I was never charged with ANYTHING, but they kept the kids anyway, collecting I don’t know how much in “interim fees” and the final $12,000 [$6,000 each] they collected for adopting them out (I have not seen, nor heard from or about them since. I don’t know if they’re alive or dead. CPS wouldn’t tell me, anyway). $12, 000 because they were “declared” special needs kids—which is not unusual after being removed from their loving home and being “passed around” among foster homes for years while being brainwashed by CPS about how lousy their parents are. What child would NOT be “special needs” child after that? (World Net Daily)