Former New York Times journalist Chris Hedges makes the point - quoted in the latest Media Lens briefing:

‘The trolls dominate or have neutralized every major institution in the country on behalf of their corporate paymasters. The press, education, Wall Street, labor and our political parties are managed by trolls or have been destroyed by them.

‘Sometimes these trolls speak like liberals. Sometimes they speak like conservatives. Sometimes they are secular. Sometimes they are Christians. But the language they use is a cover for the relentless march toward a totalitarian capitalism and a kingdom where the trolls, if not the rest of us, live happily ever after.

Deceived and disempowered

Rick Perry and John Boehner overtly make war on Social Security. Barack Obama and Nancy Pelosi say they would like to save Social Security but are sadly powerless before the decisions of a congressional super committee they helped form. The result, of course, is the same. We get to choose the rhetoric and manner in which we are deceived and disempowered. Nothing more.’

Hedges concludes: ‘The corporate coup is over. We have lost.’

In other words, we are nations under corporate occupation. The coup that has deprived us of some of our most basic freedoms – the freedom to choose governments that serve people rather than profit; to choose genuinely independent, uncompromised mass media that serve truth rather than power – cannot conceivably, as a matter of elementary logic, be in the business of exporting democracy abroad. It can only be in the business of business – maximised profits and control. It really is that simple.

This passage was taken from Media Lens’: To Avert A Bloodbath – Libya And The Press – Part 1

Related articles

• The Election March of the Trolls by Chris Hedges (dandelionsalad.wordpress.com)
• Chris Hedges: Obama: Brand for the Corporate State (via Dandelion Salad) (allianceforanidiotfreeamerica.wordpress.com)

This is to confirm that, following the publication of my website www.vickyhaigh.wordpress.com in May this year, Ms Jo Dean consulted with me because her case was ever so similar.

I have received many emails from her and she sent me a number of documents. But as a system analyst, software designer and web publisher, I have hardly any court experience. Hence, as in all victim stories, I was struggling to make sense out of the puzzle pieces, before being able to publish anything coherent and sensible.

Whilst updating Vicky Haigh’s website recently, I eventually published some of Ms Dean’s documents – without her knowledge or consent, trying to put them into an appropriate context – as one of many cases that have come to my attention – of UK Social Services stealing children aka state kidnapping.

In the same spirit, I also published The Secrecy of the Family Courts should be lifted NOW which has attracted 537 signatures and nearly 6,000 page views to date. The Twitter page on David Tune, the perpetrator in Vicky Haigh’s case, has been viewed over 38,000 times. It was published as one of 14 superinjunctions, as the only one relating to child abuse. The Untold story of gagging orders published by The Independent points out that only 69 gagging orders apply to celebrities, while 264 of them apply to children and young adults.

Given that I am publishing information for and about many victims of white collar crimes, I was following Jeremy Bentham’s quote: Publicity is the very soul of justice. It is the surest of all guards against improbity. It keeps the judge himself, while trying, under trial.

However, in my experience, publicity does not keep solicitors from acting unethically. Hence there are websites such as Solicitors from Hell or Crooked Lawyers with an interesting video by one victim.

My first websites concentrated on publicising the CAUSES of monetary ills. Lately I concentrated on victims as the EFFECTS. A full history can be viewed here.

It is a great shame to notice that Law and Order have been replaced by Crime and Disorder. As an analyst it seems to me that the legal profession is to blame more than the financial one. Hence my blog www.edm1297.info, based on the writers of the law in 1694 who tried to avoid the serious oppression of Their Majesties’ subjects when the founded The Bank of England – the mother of the creation of dishonest money.

This dishonest money system is criminogenic, i.e. it engenders crime. Two German lawyers are publishing warning signs of this Sunday becoming a repeat of 9/11 in Manhattan: on the opening of the women’s world cup – as the worst of all crimes: state terrorism.

I only wish that more men had their hearts and minds in the right place rather than hurt women and their children. After all, they were children themselves! Do they need to take some sort of revenge?

Sighingly yours,

Sabine K McNeill   [Profile on LinkedIn]

________________

Blogger, Victims Unite! > 30,000 visits since August 2010
… Empowering victims of financial exploitation and legal oppression

Web Publisher, Vicky Haigh requesting her daughter to return > 6,000 hits in less than two months
… after Doncaster “Social” Services handed her to her paedophile father

Online Petitioner, The Secrecy of Family Courts should be lifted NOW
… after having heard about too many heart wrenching stories

National Co-ordinator, Forum for Stable Currencies – meetings in Westminster since 1998
… Advocating Economic Democracy through Freedom from National Debt

Currently:

Buschower Dorfstr. 16 – 14715 Märkisch Luch – Brandenburg
T: 0049 33876 90166 – M: 07968 039 141

Sent: 23 June 2011 09:42
To: sabine@3d-metrics.com; ian@monaco.com
Subject: Fw: Recent Case Law

Dear Sabine

Please can you do this and send to me by return.  I am facing jail without it, even though I did not put this information out.

From: Ian Josephs

Sent: Thursday, June 23, 2011 7:56 AM

Subject: Re: Recent Case Law

A,

Get a letter from Sabine saying you consulted her for advice and support in your case and that she put it on the internet without your knowledge or consent, and has now removed details at your request;They cannot convict you unless you are foolish enough to be persuaded by treacherous lawyers to plead guilty ! PLEAD NOT GUILTY !!!

IAN

—– Original Message —–

To: Ian Josephs ; Victoria Haigh ; Sabine K McNeill

Sent: Thursday, June 23, 2011 1:41 AM

Subject: Re: Recent Case Law

They are asking for a retrial due to what has been put on the Internet. The cps has written seeking my recommittal and we have now lost any hope of recovering our costs from winning the criminal appeal. I expect to be arrested and taken back to the island to restand trial for abduction any day now. This is catastrophic.  It seems my own lawyers did this to me by alerting the court to what was put on the Internet.

Related articles

• Inspection of local authority fostering services and independent fostering agencies (vickyhaigh.wordpress.com)
• The Torture of an Abused Child’s Mother How Police and Social Services of Doncaster Council collude to Torment Vicky Haigh (victims-unite.net)
• Miss A’s Story: a dreadful parallel to Vicky Haigh’s victimisation by Social Services, Police et al (vickyhaigh.wordpress.com)
• BRITAIN’S BIGGEST ISSUE: Judges sanction Social Services snatching children with Superinjunctions (vickyhaigh.wordpress.com)
• Towards a registered charity: Victims Anonymous! (victims-unite.net)

It generally implies NOT to have the money to instruct a solicitor.

And solicitors may have been part of the problem in the first place.

The only way to ‘fight back’ may therefore be as a Litigant in Person (LIP). This is a harrowing experience for many different reasons.

This blog is the result of victim experiences first hand.

Related articles

• WANTED: Good Barristers for Victims of White Collar Crimes (bestbarristers.wordpress.com)
• Family Courts without a Lawyer: A Handbook for Litigants in Person [Paperback] (alisonsgypt.wordpress.com)
• Pure Public Interest Cases – without benefit from the litigation – don’t deserve legal aid funding (victims-unite.net)

1. Minister, how many horrible cases of baby snatching do you need?
2. “To avoid prejudice in the case”, don’t publish the name of the snatched baby and his mother…
3. In the Virtual Court of Public Opinion: how many men does it take to remove a sick baby from his mother’s breast?

Please spread this far and wide. Make use of the phone numbers. Make it clear to those concerned that their behaviour is unacceptable.

Phone numbers:

Ammonford Police: 01267 222020
Swansea Social Services: 01792 635700
Cafcass Swansea: 01792 645535

In scenes reminiscent of Nazi Germany, a 13 week old baby was wrenched from the breast of his mother by a female police officer at 4.30 a.m. today, in Ammonford police station, South Wales. The baby was then handed to a scruffy, unkempt single male “social worker”, who strapped him into a hard plastic car seat on a very cold night, with no addition blankets or soft toys, and drove off to an unknown destination. The mother’s partner, as well as other family members and friends present, were sickened at the cold cruelty of the collaborative action by police and Swansea Social Services.

The events in the police station took place after the mother had walked out of a secret Neath Court hearing which took place on Wednesday and Thursday earlier this week, where Swansea Social Services were attempting to remove her child. During the court proceedings, held under Statute Law, the mother challenged the lawfulness of the Court, correctly and accurately stating that Statute Law Courts are unlawful under Common Law. Despite repeated declarations by the lady judge that all parties in the Court were independent, the brave mother also exposed that the proceedings were unlawfully biased against her, her partner and their baby, by fact that a signed Contract of Partnership existed between the Family Law Division and Cafcass. Holding a copy of the signed Contract, the mother asked how the bench could be both independent and within a partnership contract.

Further bias was shown in the Court, in that Swansea Social Services staff, called as witnesses, were allowed to remain in Court throughout proceedings. The parents, however, were denied the right for their own family witnesses to be in Court to observe proceedings. McKenzie friends, acting for the parents in court were shocked to watch as a female Social Service worker was blatantly coached by her colleagues at the rear of the Court, whilst she gave testimony against the mother from the witness box. Alerted by the mother, the Judge refused to take action.

Following a difficult earlier life which had resulted in Social Services taking other children from her on the fictitious claim of emotional harm, two children later returned home to the mother with horrifying stories of abuse in Social Services care. Contrary to the ‘personality disorder’ picture painted by Swansea Social services, the children were even prepared to write their own statements as to the loving care they had received from their mother, both during her period on alcohol and drugs, and subsequently since she had started a new life, in a new home, with the hard working and loving father of her new child.

Harassed by Swansea Social Services since before the birth of her latest child, bullied with up to 16 telephone calls from them in a single day, suffering a stream of different and unknown social workers at her door every week, as well as aggressive calls from Swansea Legal Services, the mother was totally failed by the poor, if not incompetent, performance of her Legal Team. Knowing from previous experience that Social Services were now set on taking her newborn son, she decided to act for herself as Litigant in Person, assisted by two members of the public.

Despite being exhausted by disturbed nights with her baby, the need to leave the Court to breastfeed, and being untrained in law, this exceptional and loving mother was able to expose that the Court proceedings were both biased and unlawful. She also exposed that previous Court Orders were unlawful, in that they contained no signatures. Family members highlighted that psychological reports, alleging that the mother had a personality disorder, had also been exposed as liable to errors, and were based on pseudo scientific theory. A psychologist had also recommended ‘treatment’ for the Christian mother based on Buddhist meditation mantras.

Walking out of the Court in disgust, the exhausted mother sought refuge for a few days to recover, before resuming the fight to protect her child. This action was to unleash a massive police search in the South West of England, before the mother was finally arrested by South Wales police at 1.30 in the morning on her way back to her parents. Witnesses to the police action watched with incredulity as five police cars, festooned with blue flashing lights, stopped cars carrying the mother and her baby. Those present at the scene report that the ten police officers present were cold and aggressive in their haste to pull the mother and her child from the car, before racing off at speeds over 70 mph to Ammonford police station.

Desperate to stop the baby being given to the grubby South Wales Social Worker, the mother’s parents and friends had demanded to see the Court Order authorising the police and Swansea Social Services’ action. They were appalled to be given a Swansea Court Order containing no Court Stamp and no signature – omissions which render the document invalid at law.

Despite his dependence on his mother’s breast milk, due to a serious allergy to formula milk products which could result in his death, his parents and friends now have no idea of the location of the baby, or the quality of his care.

Readers of the story will be further alarmed to know that Swansea Social Services are under ongoing investigation for incompetence and allegedly dangerous practices which have placed other children in harm. That this can be done via unlawful and secret Family Courts, and with the full collusion of the police, is a state of affairs that should drive every person to demand immediate investigative action from their Member of Parliament. After all, these are the very people responsible for overseeing these disgraceful and disturbing events.

We should perhaps remember that a vicious part the Nazi system established itself through a creeping infiltration of the social services responsible for the care of the physically and mentally disabled. We have been warned.

More on state kidnapping here.

And here’s Christopher Booker in The Telegraph reporting Parents denied a voice in court against the child-snatchers, where Lord Justice Thorpe in the Court of Appeal ‘aghast’ at the way three children and been removed from their family.

Dear Mr Speed

This is to invite you or someone else in your department to a meeting that will take place tomorrow, Tuesday, between 2 and 4 in Committee Room 16 of the House of Commons. Whilst I don’t expect you to attend at such short notice, I thought you might want to send Shona Manson whom we’ve been in touch with, or somebody else we can work with.

My main reason for inviting you is your stance on punishing dishonesty and other unethical behaviour. To give you a feel for what to expect, I attach three documents pertaining to the meeting as well as the most scandalous bankruptcy we are aware of: Mr David Fabb. One of the judges involved said: “This bankruptcy order ought not have been made. But I am using my “judicial discretion” not to annul it.” How is that supposed to increase our confidence in your system and procedures, I wonder?

Our group has accumulated a vast amount of evidence and knowledge about slippages in the Courts that your Service seems to miss, when Bankruptcy Orders are issued based on false documents, forms and evidence.

And while I appreciate that you don’t deal with individual cases, we have accumulated summaries of many to demonstrate what we know. It would therefore help if you were to support us in our efforts to annul bankruptcy orders that we found to be legally invalid and thus null and void.

Dr Vincent Cable is quite aware of our group efforts. Hence I would appreciate your collaboration.

With many thanks in advance,

Sabine K McNeill
_________________

And here’s the answer that I got:

Dear Ms McNeill,

Thank you for your invitation of 24 January. Mr Speed has asked me to reply on his behalf, I apologise that I did not have an opportunity to do so in advance of the meeting last week.

The role of The Insolvency Service is to administer insolvent estates following orders of the court. Concerns members of the Forum have about the Court Service or the actions of the Judiciary are a matter for the Ministry of Justice and not The Insolvency Service.

Official receivers have neither the authority nor the resources to investigate or challenge documentation which has been considered by the court. If you have the evidence that bankruptcy orders were made on false documentation, forms and evidence then the correct route is for the individual to ask the court to annul the bankruptcy order. This is a matter between the individual, the petitioning creditor and the court.

There is an established review and appeal process for individuals who wish to challenge the findings of the court. Any party to proceedings who believes a judge has incorrectly applied the law or erred in the exercise of his / her discretion has a right of appeal to a higher court.

Yours sincerely,

Shona Manson

I began the meeting when Nic Dakin arrived, the marvellously supportive MP of victim veteran Stanley Embling.

Bankrupt victim and expert in bankruptcy law Gedaljahu Ebert:

Here we see victim David Fabb, whose group of ten solvent companies was bankrupted by accountancy company Deloittes.

Here we see Alex Cunningham, MP for Stockton North:

Here we see the very experienced Peter Oakes speaking

and here Mr Ebert for a second time:

Those videos that were too long for this blog can be viewed on http://bit.ly/hFbs3h

• Targeted individual Maurice Kirk
• Myself about Royal Charters and the Public Inquiry
• Most experienced Paul Talbot-Jenkins
• House of Lords Host Lord Ahmed
• Chairman Austin Mitchell MP – part 1
• Chairman Austin Mitchell MP – part 2
• Supportive MP John Hemming
• Supportive MP John McDonnell.

Here is the English version.

And here is the report that gave rise to include victims of state kidnapping in our list.

Under UK News & Views, it has opened a category Victims Unite and published two stories so far.

There is little I can add to our previous exchanges.

I am aware that your organisation is representing a number of individuals who believe that the courts should not have made bankruptcy orders against them. The correct way in which to deal with those issues is by way of appeal to a higher court.

I am also aware of issues raised by those individuals concerning the appointment of insolvency practitioners as trustees of their bankruptcy estates. The function of a trustee in bankruptcy, as set out in the insolvency legislation, is to get in, realise and distribute the bankrupt’s estate in accordance with the legislation. In doing so it is the duty of the insolvency practitioner to use his or her professional and commercial judgment to maximise the realisation of assets for the benefit of creditors. The insolvency practitioner acts under the supervision of the court, it is generally open to creditors, and debtors, to bring matters before the court where they believe their interests are being unfairly harmed.

If you consider the individuals you represent have been failed by the judicial system then this is a matter you should raise with the Ministry of Justice.

Every person who acts as an insolvency practitioner must be authorised to do so: either directly by the Secretary of State or by one of a number of Recognised Professional Bodies. The existence of a proper complaints procedure was one of the factors taken into account when the bodies were initially recognised to authorise practitioners, it is open to any party who is dissatisfied with the professional conduct of an insolvency practitioner to raise their concerns with the practitioner’s authorising body. If a complaint is made, the authorising body will consider whether professional misconduct has occurred, and whether sanctions should be applied.

The fees chargeable to a bankruptcy estate are set by Parliament. The remuneration of a trustee is largely dependent on the amount of work to be done in properly administering the proceedings. In large and complex cases, the work necessary to fulfil the trustees duties will be considerably greater and expenses correspondingly higher. Under the provisions of the current insolvency legislation, it is for the creditors’ committee (a representative body of the creditors) or the creditors in general meeting to approve the basis and level of remuneration. If you wish more information on the appointment, functions, powers and payment of trustees in bankruptcy, I would refer you to The Service’s publication “Trustees and Liquidators in Bankruptcies and Compulsory Liquidations” which is available from our website www.insolvency.gov.uk. Additional guidance on the remuneration of insolvency office holders can be found in Statement of Insolvency Practice 9 which is available from the web-site of the Association of Business Recover Professionals www.r3.org.uk.

The Office of Fair Trading (OFT) has recently published a study into the corporate insolvency market.  The study looked into the structure of the market and any features in the market which could result in harm, such as higher fees or lower recovery rates for certain groups of creditors.  The study is available at the following link: http://www.oft.gov.uk/shared_oft/reports/Insolvency/oft1245. The Government intends to publish a response to the OFT study during October, which will be placed on The Insolvency Service website.

As I understand money laundering this is the exchange of money or assets obtained criminally for money or other assets that are ‘clean’. I can see nothing in the proper administration of a bankruptcy estate, where a trustee realises the assets of the bankrupt which the legislation states form the bankruptcy estate and distributes funds to creditors, which constitutes money laundering. I would ask you to refrain from implying that I am committing criminal offences without providing any evidence to support your accusations. Had I any evidence within my direct knowledge which indicated a criminal act I would report this appropriately.

However, if you hold any evidence of any criminal activity then this is a matter you should report to the Police. Alternatively you may wish to contact the UK Financial Intelligence Unit of the Serious Organised Crime Unit with a view to submitting a Suspicious Activity Report. Further details are available from the web-site www.soca.gov.uk

Yours sincerely,

Shona Manson