GroundReport.com

Payroll Processors Driving Sen Menendez to Propose Expensive Federal Divorce Legislation

Thu, 16 May 2013 07:19:32 -0500

The US Constitution lays out the separation of federal and state responsibilities and one of the clear domains of states is divorce, marriage and family law. However in 1986 strict federal laws passed that forced states to build expensive infrastructure for support enforcement in order to receive federal aid. These changes forced states to change their divorce processes and forced the creation of a huge federal industry for child support collection. The Bradley Amendment of 1986 made divorce a federal issue.

The Bradley Amendment of 1986 was a major milestone for President Clinton’s first term and laid out detailed procedures for the administration, collection and enforcement of child support collection. Senator Bradley of New Jersey sponsored this legislation. States must have expensive and sprawling computer systems in place to deduct support from paychecks, tax refunds, lottery winnings and more. Even more systems must be in place to integrate with the US passport system, IRS and other federal agencies as well as to report to credit bureaus. The Bradley Amendment, under the guise of protecting children, required States to install hundreds of millions of dollars of new systems in order to receive federal aid so states had no choice but to comply.

While the Bradley Amendment lays out detailed computer systems requirements it pays no attention to the circumstance of the parent’s debt. It sets a threshold of $2,500 1986 dollars to place a parent into the federal enforcement system. The Bradley Amendment has no appeal system and doesn’t take into account the great variance in state divorce laws and processes. The Bradley Amendment states that parents must make expeditious support modification requests to avoid arrears but this is simply impossible in most state laws. Under the Bradley Amendment parents who lose their jobs or reduce their incomes for any reason whatsoever are placed into the enforcement system and will immediately be subject to lien, wage garnishment, asset seizure, credit reporting, tax refund and lottery intercept and more. In the Bradley Amendment there is no statute of limitations for divorce enforcement, no court in the USA can reduce the support arrearage for any reason and the debts survive death, bankruptcy and medical incapacitation. A parent with children in their thirties or forties can retroactively collect arrears under the Bradley Amendment without notification to the offending parent. The Bradley Amendment made a new class of super-debt and has created a new class of debtors that have no civil rights whatsoever.

While the supporters of the Bradley Amendment laud their obvious accomplishments of collecting vast sums of child support, they ignore the victims of the system. Victims of the system are responsible parents who pay support and are present in their children’s lives but who hit temporary income speed bumps. Whether the speed bump is deployment, unemployment, illness, jail or any cause, based on the Bradley Amendment divorce debt accrues and subject to mandatory enforcement actions with no chance of appeal or reduction of arrears. Victims are parents who can’t afford attorneys or appeals. Victims are low income earners trapped in a lifetime of wage garnishment and enforcement action with no hope of ever paying down faultless debt. A family who runs into troubled times may lose their homes, savings and more but under the Bradley Amendment the same family that is divorced may spend a lifetime with an 80% to 90% effective tax rate after wage garnishment for the rest of their lives. There are millions of victims living under the permanent and immutable penalties of the Bradley Amendment.

The strength of penalties in the Bradley Amendment, with due process rights explicitly precluded, has given local divorce courts incredible power. Any divorce ruling is subject to federal enforcement with no questions asked. Judges in the smallest courts with no juries or constitutional burdens will have their verdicts enforced by the massive and extensive systems that states are forced to provide as part of the Bradley Amendment.

We have been living with the Bradley Amendment since 1986 and its successes and atrocities have been well documented. But now in 2013 another New Jersey Senator, Bob Menendez-D, wants to take the Bradley Amendment further with the Strengthen and Vitalize Enforcement of Child Support (SAVE Child Support) Act (S.508.). The SAVE act lays out even more procedures and expensive systems that states must adapt to, in Bob Menendez’s own words, collect support from ‘dead-beats’.

New York and New Jersey are known for their powerful and unfair divorce industries but it seems like too much of a coincidence that New Jersey Senators are so concerned about child support collection that their US Senators must lobby so hard for redundant and expensive federal legislation. Besides the welfare of children, which should be the top priority of every State in the US, what makes it so interesting for multiple New Jersey senators to propose massively expensive and complicated computer systems to further strengthen the federal child support collection systems?

One place to find the answer to this question is to check the lobbying activities behind this bill. A quick search of Opensecrets.org shows that the only lobby for this bill working with Bob Menendez is the National Child Support Enforcement Association.

The NCSEA is the trade organization of the Child Support Enforcement industry and a review of their conference speakers show that this industry is driven largely by payment processors and networks, divorce professionals and employees of state divorce industries. Ultimately state divorce industries and businesses who process payroll and create government computer systems are the ones who see the most financial benefits from massive federal programs that SAVE and the Bradley Amendment mandate and as it turns out, these are the supporters of the NCSEA.

Digging a little deeper ADP, headquartered in New Jersey, is the largest processor payroll in the United States and they play a predominant role in the corporate sponsorship of the NCSEA. The powerful New Jersey senator Frank Lautenberg was the CEO of ADP before entering into politics and this connection has made ADP a very powerful company in New Jersey. Companies like ADP are the ones who see the most financial benefit from massive federal programs that mandate payroll collections and new government computer systems and it makes perfect sense why Bob Menendez, and not Frank Lautenberg, would sponsor a bill that benefits ADP and other payment processors so greatly.

The Bradley Amendment of 1986 has destroyed the lives of millions of innocent parents with draconian penalties that supersede the power of any court in the USA and often times defy logic. The bill assumes that any parent who has arrears of more than $2,500 (limit set in 1986) is a criminal and subject to vast computerized enforcement systems. Senator Menendez and the NCSEA are proud of all the dead-beats they are punishing but they ignore the realities that drive parents to arrears. They ignore the unconstitutional courts that create impossible financial situations that many parents face and they ignore the normal rhythms of life such as illness, recession and unemployment that can lead to arrears.

I’m all for supporting children and being a responsible parent but I’m also for transparency in government and it’s time for Senator Menendez to come clean and admit the true motivation for his bill. Any bills that propose massive federal computer systems that states are forced to join must have a careful cost-benefit analysis before implementation. In this case the cost to tax-payers is extremely high and the beneficiaries are clearly the companies who maintain and create payment networks. A quick review of the sponsors of the NCSEA verify who benefits from strict collection laws including Xerox, HP, ADP, Maximus and other payment processors. A line must be drawn between the interests of children and families and the interest of payment networks lobbying for more garnishments and payment processing rules. Ultimately these companies are lobbying for further federal regulation in State matters and ruining the lives of millions with indiscriminate, computer generated enforcement actions that bypass due process procedures.

Sources:

http://www.ncsea.org/documents/2013-NCSEA-Annual-Conf-Prospectus_updated.pdf

http://www.congressionalresearch.com/RS20642/document.php

http://www.grassley.senate.gov/news/Article.cfm?customel_dataPageID_1502=44985

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/666

http://voices.yahoo.com/anniversary-bradley-amendment-continues-child-support-8377645.html?cat=25

An Open Letter to Mississippi Attorney General Jim Hood Asking That He Review Jeffrey Havard Case

Mon, 13 May 2013 23:41:51 -0500

Jeffrey Havard

An open letter to Mississippi Attorney General Jim Hood

Written By Lori Howard

Office of the MS Attorney General

ATTN: Hon. Jim Hood

P.O. Box 220

Jackson, MS 39205

Attorney General Hood,

I am writing to you regarding a statement your office made on your behalf to CNN on February 20, 2012:

"Our office has the singular responsibility to not only ensure that the guilty are punished but that the innocent are set free."

If that is the case, here is my question to you: what happened with Jeffrey Havard?

Jeffrey Havard, as you know, has been on your Death Row since 2002, however, there are significant problems with his conviction.

Mainly;

State and Federal laws regarding cases that involve the type of accusations leveled at Mr. Havard, mandate that all evidence is to be reviewed by experts qualified in child sexual abuse. This was not done.

The State tried Mr. Havard without ever attempting to establish sexual assault with expert testimony on forensics.

The standard of proof for sexual assault, according to the law, was never met.

The prosecution tried this case, never establishing "to a degree of medical certainty" that a sexual assault had occurred.

Steven Hayne had informed the District Attorney’s Office, prior to trial, that there was not enough evidence to conclude a diagnosis of sexual battery.

The autopsy, which was never introduced into evidence, states that the child's body "was unremarkable" and makes no reference to sexual assault whatsoever.

Despite the law requiring the standard of proof, prosecutors put Mr. Havard’s life in jeopardy based only on unqualified and faulty observations, since the charge was predicated on injuries that did not exist.

Based on the above, this shows that no scientific methodology (differential diagnosis) was ever performed, since the so-called injuries did not exist.

Haynes testimony only rose to the level of possibility which did not meet the standard of proof in court, which is a "degree of medical certainty."

Emergency room staff (State's witnesses) claim to have seen rips, tears and bleeding in the anal area. Steven Hayne observed nothing of the sort in his autopsy report, and photographic evidence indicates no such thing.

Still, the ER staff gave this testimony in court and it was never challenged or objected to by the defense. Their "invalid testimony" was/is the State’s "case in chief."

This further underscores that none of the witnesses were qualified. "Observations" are not tests or forensic reviews.

Mr. Havards trial attorneys did no independent investigation of any kind, which the law requires in a capital murder case. Attorney Sermos admitted in open court that he did not understand the autopsy and had no medical knowledge.

The Court wrongfully denied Mr. Havard's request for his own medical expert. Instead, the Court recommended that his attorneys contact the State’s expert (Hayne).

Mr. Havard's attorneys did not contact Hayne or anyone else with the medical expertise they admittedly lacked.

The State and the Court improperly placed the burden of proof on Mr. Havard to explain the anal dilation (the ONLY binding factor in the case).

A study at Duke University estimated that death penalty cases take three to five times longer than a typical murder trial (http://fds.duke.edu/db/attachment/301).

Jury selection for this capital murder case took one day (12/17/02), and the prosecution presented their case in one day (12/18/02), leading the trial judge to remark: "the case has been moving along quite satisfactorily."

Mr. Havards trial took just 48 hours from jury selection to sentencing.

There are other factors, too numerous to mention, however, I would like to bring a few other things to your attention;

This is a direct quote from the prosecution (Rosenblatt) to the jury during closing arguments: "This case I cannot possibly understand. Please don't try to understand this case."

Additionally, Mr. Havard was told at the police station that Chloe Britt died due to a vicious sexual assault. Mr. Havard could not explain it because it never occurred. He did not know that she had died from a closed head injury until he saw it on the arrest warrant, at which time he immediately asked for Detective Manley, telling him that Chloe had accidentally fallen.

Mr. Havard used bad judgment by not telling Chloe’s mother Rebecca Britt immediately upon her return from the store that Chloe had accidently fallen, and he was wrong to think he knew how to care for the infant after her fall. The situation was new to Mr. Havard as the child and her mother had only been living with him for 3 weeks.

Mr. Havard’s bad judgment in a time of crisis does not equate to murder and sexual assault. Being guilty of bad judgment does not make Mr. Havard death penalty eligible. It merely makes him human, capable of making an honest mistake.

Mr. Havard waived his right to an attorney and fully cooperated with the investigation.

Mr. Havard requested a polygraph but was refused.

Mr. Havard refused a plea agreement and based his decision not to testify in his own behalf on his attorney’s advice that the taped interrogation spoke for itself, although they had told him that he would be permitted to testify until just prior to trial.

Mr. Havard refused the plea he was offered because, being innocent, he believed in the sanctity of the Judicial System in this country. He believed that truth and justice would prevail.

This case MUST be reviewed by your office since your job is to "ensure the innocent be set free."

The State of Mississippi has done Chloe Britt's family and Jeffrey Havard a grave injustice.

I look forward to your response.

Sincerely,

Lori Howard

A Concerned United States Citizen

Please take a moment to send a letter or email to Mississippi Attorney General Jim Hood to ask that he review Jeffrey Havard’s case.

Visit the Jeffrey Havard letter writing campaign page on Facebook.

Jeffrey Havard currently sits wrongfully convicted on death row in Mississippi for the sexual assault and murder of his girlfriend’s six-month-old daughter, Chloe Britt. Chloe’s death was a tragic accident, not a murder. Havard accidentally dropped Chloe after giving her a bath. According to Havard, Chloe slipped out of his hands and hit her head on the toilet. The evidence in the case supports his claims. Jeffrey Havard is innocent.

Visit www.FreeJeffreyHavard.org to learn more about this case.

Please also take a moment to sign and share Jeffrey’s petition: http://www.change.org/petitions/united-states-district-judge-keith-starrett-grant-jeffrey-havard-a-new-trial-to-prove-he-was-wrongfully-convicted?utm_source=share_petition&utm_medium=url_share&utm_campaign=url_share_before_sign

Contact Mississippi Attorney General Jim Hood here:

Office of the MS Attorney General

ATTN: Hon. Jim Hood

P.O. Box 220

Jackson, MS 39205

You can send an email using this link: http://agjimhood.com/index.php/contact

Obama looking to bipartisan bill for legislative success

Thu, 09 May 2013 03:53:44 -0500

The US Senate is contemplating a bipartisan bill that could bring the major changes in the US immigration system. Obama is banking upon this bill after the defeat of his drive on finances and gun control.

Campo, a 21-year-old University of Maryland pre-medical student, is certain that his future in United States may be secured by this bill. He was nine years old when along with his father, a hospital director in El Salvador, escaped in November 2001.He said that his family was endangered and frequently attacked by the gangs of El Salvador.

Obama said at a news conference that he could write a different bill with some changes. At the same time he asserted that it meets the basic conditions that he had set out from at the start. The bill will reinforce the security of borders and permit new skilled and unskilled job seekers to find jobs in the United States. President Obama expressed similar confidence and reservations about the clauses that have been drafted collectively by the Republicans and the Democrats.

Obama mugs an impasse in thrusting for the bill as he is not in a mood to offend the Republicans. Even if he remains impartial and the major reshuffle of Immigration Laws is not passed, he will still be criticized for not contesting for votes. There is every apprehension that this bill may have to face tough debate in the House of Representatives.

However, Republicans have already failed to woo the growing electorate of Hispanics in the elections of 2012.

The bill has been drafted by Marco Rubio, Florida Senator and Sen John McCain. An executive order issued by Obama in 2012 exempts Campo, a university student, from present immigration laws for two years, with the likelihood of renewal. The order was promulgated after the failure of DREAM Act legislation in Congress and will give relief to more than 800,000 illegal immigrants.

Murder Media and the Truth Behind Violent News

Wed, 01 May 2013 13:51:56 -0500

The Sensationalism

It’s no secret that Americans have a fascination with the killer instinct. It’s in the television we watch (from following around blood spatter pattern analyst/serial killers to an endless supply of CSI), and it seems to be built into the video game culture. And for the most part, these forms of entertainment are just that—an understood, safe outlet for morbid curiosity.

The problem is that the entertainment is starting to show up in some strange places. Like the news headlines.

On any given day (especially if you live in a major city) taking a glance at the local news is enough to keep you cooped up at home or nervously looking over your shoulder. Stabbings, shooting sprees, and people eating each other’s faces dominate the headlines without question. But while violent crimes are very real, the fact is they don’t happen nearly as often as they get reported on.

The Question

Why are violent reports the ones we always here about? Probably because the crimes that are really happening on a significant scale—like burglary, robbery and auto theft—just make for less captivating stories. Problem is, they’re real.

The Reality

We looked at four major U.S. cities, and focused on what the media was reporting on in a given week, and how it compared to what the police had reported. The media covers violent crimes 20-30% of the time, even though murder represents less than 1% of the crimes committed.

Oakland

The 0.8% of murders that happened in this week took up 69.2% of the news coverage. Nothing was covered on the 19.6% of burglary incidents or 24.9% of auto theft from police reports.

New York

In the empire state, 0.4% of the murder cases ballooned into 27.4% of the media’s attention. They neglected to mention any of the 25.2% of burglaries and car thefts.

Atlanta

A mere 0.1% of murders turned into 27.3% of the news covered in this week. And, somehow, a reported 0% of rape incidents occupied 27.3% of the news.

Dallas

Larceny and auto theft took up more than half of the reported crimes this week, and neither was mentioned in the news.

What We've Learned

Those attention-grabbing headlines about murders and stabbings may help pass the time during the daily commute, but they aren’t so great at informing the community of its real problems. Based on what we found, you’re always more likely to become a victim of theft—even in a city with the highest murder rate. It’s kind of like worrying about being struck by lightning so much that you forget your boots and catch cold.

The Good News

The crimes that are really happening out there are ones that most people can take preventative measures against.

On average, a person in the U.S. is over 1,000 times more likely to experience a theft or burglary over a violent crime. Even a stroll down the block will tell you that there’s more broken glass from cars being broken into than police tape surrounding a murder scene. So instead of barricading yourself up in your room, relax and enjoy a night out. People are much more likely to take your things than endanger your life, regardless of how scary the headlines might sound.

This post was written by Kevin Raposo, a blogger for SimpliSafe Home Security and Infobia. Kevin covers issues regarding security, crime, safety, consumer technology, and crime.

Hurricane Sandy Victim Ready for a New Home after 6 Months of Quarantine

Tue, 30 Apr 2013 20:16:28 -0500

Guardians of Rescue, a non-profit organization dedicated to helping animals in danger, have once again come to the aid of man's best friend. Midnight, a male chocolate lab mix, was discovered in the aftermath of Hurricane Sandy, along with many others lost in the storm. Caring for and then reuniting the pet with the owner is a top priority, but Midnight's situation proved to be more complicated. Found wandering around the Bergen Beach area with an injured paw and no tags, the Department of Health required him to be quarantined for six months, a standard used to safeguard against possible rabies contamination.

"Most likely, Midnight's fence came down in the storm and he became lost, injured and disoriented, made worse by the damage of his environment and inability to recognize his former surroundings," said Robert Misseri, president and founder of Guardians of Rescue. "Our mission now is to find him a loving home or reunite him with his family.”

Midnight, whose name should perhaps be changed to Lucky, was cared for during the quarantine period by the loving staff at Central Veterinary Association located in Valley Stream, NY. There he was able to spend his time in comfortable surroundings with a dedicated staff who volunteered their time and efforts to his care. In addition, the Best Friends Animal Sanctuary, stepped in and donated $1,500 towards his board there. Midnight will be picked up by Guardians of Rescue tomorrow morning at 11am and taken to Save a Pet Rescue in Port Jefferson, where he will be available for adoption and soon placed with his forever home.

Hurricane Sandy resulted in the displacement and injury of so many pets, and at this date, over 150 have been cared for with medical treatment, food, shelter and temporary homes by the volunteers of Guardians of Rescue. In addition they have also helped families in need and still suffering from the after affects of the storm with the purchase of food for the pets who are still with their owners. The effort is ongoing, and the work will continue as long as it is needed.

To learn more, or to make a donation to support the Guardians of Rescue, log onto www.guardiansofrescue.org.

Government Improvises Health Grants Norms for Minorities

Tue, 30 Apr 2013 04:59:23 -0500

According to United States Department of Health and Human Services, they have undertaken major efforts to improvise the health and well being of racial and ethnic minorities. As a part of this, it has recently announced the availability of the State Partnership Grant Program. The Office of Minority Health (OMH) has actively collaborated with the Office of the Secretary for these minority grants. The mission of OMH is to look after the health of minority communities by providing policies and programs that will help to eradicate health inequality spread amongst these various groups of minorities. The mission is to build a nation free from inequalities in health and health care. The OMH so announces anticipating funds from the State Partnership Program. It will also look forward to work with individuals and organizations to build the nation which is devoid of any health disparities.

The eligible organizations and individuals should be an entity with the state or territorial government. The applicant organizations must have a minimum experience of five years to manage initiatives, projects or activities that pertain to minority health care objectives. The authorities must be facilitated with proper documentation that justifies the official status of the organization. Furthermore, once the health grant is approved, the office of the organization will serve as the head office for the project and the grant implementation, management and evaluation will be carried from their end. The starting date for this grant application is 25th April 2013 and the last date for receiving the application forms will be 28th May 2013.

These minority grants are useful to the communities to fund their education, business, research, job training, technology, social programs and other uses apart from health care. To apply for such grants one needs to closely pay attention to the grants’ application of the starting date and the closing date. One also needs to study the arena of the grants and choose the grant which perfectly satisfies their need. A grant application filled up with proper details and authenticated with legal and correct documents have more chances of being selected than others.

These health grants have a lot of competition so it is important to check the grant application properly. Even if one doesn’t get through one time to get the benefit of the grant, it is advised to keep on applying for multiple grants at the same time. These health grants truly act as beneficiaries to create an equality in terms of health care in the country.

This article is provided George Bailey, who is a renowned author and has authored articles for various websites. He has written articles about health grants along with several other types of grants for various websites. Learn how to apply for minority grants and where to find them, at allamericangrantguide.com.

Infowars: Terrorism by Conspiracy

Mon, 29 Apr 2013 18:41:33 -0500

“There is an irony that the most anti-gay [groups] are Al Qaeda and the American Right-Wing” Former U.S. Congressman Barney Frank

The above quote doesn’t really have much to do with Infowars, Alex Jones and their conspiracy theories, but it does draw an interesting connection. And, after all, it’s just funny. Sometimes it's good to start out with a little humor before we address a very serious subject.

We all know now that Tamerlan Tsarnaev and his brother Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, the two Boston Marathon bombers were essentially a pair of “losers” who have fully experienced their ten minutes of shame.

Many right-wingers have been chasing shadows, focusing on the non-existent al Qaeda and Russian connections. However, as we know, the only connection to al Qaeda our homegrown lowlifes have is them visiting the al Qaeda website Inspire magazine, where they learned to make the pressure cooker bombs.

What the mainstream media is not talking about is that according to a recent AP interview with the Boston Marathon bomber's uncle, “Tamerlan took an interest in Infowars, a conspiracy theory website. Khozhugov said Tamerlan was interested in finding a copy of the book "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion," the classic anti-Semitic hoax, first published in Russia in 1903, that claims a Jewish plot to take over the world.”

That’s right, Alex Jones’ conspiracy theory website Infowars taught the two losers to distrust and outright hate the U.S. government so much that they no longer were able to give a rat’s ass about the U.S. population.

Alex Jones’ site, Infowars, has been stoking anti-government conspiracies to gullible readers for years. Infowars steady stream of misinformation has been radicalizing both right-wing nutcases and Muslim terrorists alike.

This weekend, perennial bigot New York Congressman Peter King suggested we forget “political correctness” and begin profiling the entire Muslim community. Given King’s logic, perhaps we should also be profiling the entire right-wing movement, especially the sheeple that listen to Alex Jones and Glenn Beck?

After all, according to journalist Peter Bergen and the New America Foundation, since the September 11, 2001 bombings to the end of 2012, there were no successful bomb plots by jihadist terrorists in the United States. However, jihadists did kill 17 people in the United States in four separate incidents during this time. All of the incidents involved guns, which the NRA wants to make more available to terrorists, including Nidal Hassan's shooting rampage at Fort Hood which killed 13 people. On the other hand, racist, bigoted, religious, and anti-government right-wing extremists have killed 29 people in the same period.

Following-up on the most recent ricin letters mailed to President Obama, Mississippi Senator Wicker, and a retired Mississippi judge, James Everett Dutschke was arrested. Dutschke is a martial arts instructor and former Republican politician. He was charged with, ''knowingly developing, producing, stockpiling, transferring, acquiring, retaining and possessing a biological agent, toxin and delivery system, for use as a weapon, to wit: ricin.''

Like the Boston Marathon bombers, the true motivations for committing such a despicable terrorist act are unknown. Nonetheless, the very fact that Dutschke is a Republican leads me to believe he may likely hold some delusional extreme anti-government right-wing beliefs, like those spewed out on a daily bases at Infowars. Dutschke has denied the charges leveled against him and has claimed, “I'm a patriotic American.”

Of course, the “Patriot Movement” is filled with folks that share delusional extreme anti-government beliefs which have at times spilled into racism, bigotry, and even violence. Although most so called “Patriots” do not become violent criminals.

According to the Southern Poverty Law Center , “Generally, Patriot groups define themselves as opposed to the ‘New World Order,’ engage in groundless conspiracy theorizing, or advocate or adhere to extreme antigovernment doctrines. Antigovernment groups do not necessarily advocate or engage in violence or other criminal activities, though some have. Many warn of impending government violence or the need to prepare for a coming revolution.”

We know Alex Jones and Infowars influenced the Boston Marathon bombers. We know right-wing extremists have killed more Americans than jihadist in the last 10 years. The question is, if Representative Peter King is so concerned about the roots of terrorism in the U.S. than why hasn’t he called for the infiltration of so-called Patriot groups, anti-abortion organizations, and pro-gun militias? After all, the right-wing poses a greater threat to the safety of everyday Americans than a few self-radicalized pimply faced homegrown jihadists.

Hi-Tech Export - Latest Victim of ‘Fake Job Scam’

Tue, 23 Apr 2013 12:07:05 -0500

This piece of writing is in response to the ‘fake job scam’ that has been doing the rounds for over a year now involving Hi-Tech Export name.

Hi-Tech authorities have come to know about a piece of news that is causing irreversible damage to the company’s reputation. This is extremely undignified and derogatory for an organization like Hi-Tech Export.

Thus, it becomes all the more important to intimate the job aspirants, who recently received a fake job offer from Hi-Tech Export, about the ‘fake job scam’.
The email id used by the scammer is info.hitechexport@usa.com.

With this writing piece, Hi-Tech Export wants to make it evident and apparent to everyone that the company has not offered any job to anyone via internet. All those who have received offer letters from Hi-Tech Export online have been duped and trapped. Hi-Tech Export is a victim in this case and hence, the company’s involvement in the ‘fake job scam’ is completely false.

By doing something as grave as this, fraudsters have not only ruined the image of Hi-Tech Export, but also played with the careers and emotions of several job aspirants.

We highly condemn the action and are no where to be held responsible for this.

Kindly acknowledge this as a corrigendum published on behalf of the management of Hi-Tech Export.

All those who have received a job offer online from the mentioned email id are requested to ignore it and consider it null and void henceforth.

Due to high unemployment rate everywhere, several such cases have surfaced in the recent past too.

Such scams bring in humiliation to the concerned company and all the hard work done by the management & employees goes down the drain within seconds. This is a sheer waste of time, energy and resources of the company. It brings with it indignity to the organization.

Hi-Tech management sincerely regrets the inconvenience caused to everyone. The scammers abused the privacy policies and disgraced the company by misusing its identity.

However, with the issue of this corrigendum, every job aspirant is alerted and warned against such fake job offers in future.

“We do not hire people online and do not offer job via internet.”-
hitechexport.com

Right-Wing Bigotry Explodes

Sun, 21 Apr 2013 21:12:21 -0500

If there is one thing we have seen this week it is the fact that the radical right-wing media machine is still extremely racist and Islamophobic. Within hours of the Boston Marathon bombings, right-wing blogs and main-stream media outlets began spewing out their willfully false bigoted speculation about the attackers. Well before the identities of the brothers Tamerlan and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev were ever known by law enforcement.

Of course Rupert Murdock’s media outlets, Fox News and the New York Post, were ahead of the pack in their assaults on in general Muslims, Arabs, dark skinned people, and immigrants. Glenn Beck, Brietbart.com, World Net Daily, and Infowars.com all promoted similar bogus conspiracy theories about President Obama whisking away Saudi’s or Moroccan’s in black helicopters just hours after the bombings. Obviously, all part of a secret false flag operation Obama and the top pentagon brass planned for years. How else could Obama declare Marshall Law, send the U.S.military into our streets, and confiscate all our guns?

Oh wait, the government did declare Martial Law and send the military into the streets of Boston, yet they let us keep our guns? Hmmm? As Meat Loaf likes to say, “two out of three ain’t bad”? Certainly two out of three is enough to draw vast unsubstantiated conclusions for the Agenda 21/New World Order conspiracy nuts, also known as the current Republican Party.

It turns out that the bombers actually are Muslim. They’re just not dark skinned or from the Middle East. One answer for that came from Texas Republican Representative Louie Gohmert who suggested Muslims were being "trained to act like Hispanic[s]".

"We know Al Qaeda has camps over with the drug cartels on the other side of the Mexican border," he said Wednesday on C-Span. "We know that people that are now being trained to come in and act like Hispanic [sic] when they are radical Islamists. We know these things are happening.”

The fact that the brothers are Caucasian (literally from the Caucasus’s) and came into the U.S. in 2002 from Russia and Chechnya, as political refugees, hasn’t stopped the right-wing attacks on dark skinned men and women from the Middle East and Latin America. Go figure?

Even the extremists Islamic jihadists from the Caucasus’ disavowed any association with our two young Boston bombers, the Tsarnaev brothers. According to a recent Wall Street Journal report, A jihadist website linked to an Islamist movement founded by a leading Chechen militant posted a statement Sunday that said the group bears no responsibility for the Boston Marathon bombing. “The Caucasian Mujahadeen are not fighting with the United States of America. We are at war with Russia…” That’s because the U.S. hates what the Russians are doing in Chechnya much like the Caucasian Mujahadeen.

While we don’t know the full story of the brothers yet, it seems more and more evident that the Boston Marathon brothers were essentially acting as “lone wolves”. Yes, the bombers may have been inspired by Al Qaeda websites and rhetoric. However, they do not appear to be members of any known right-wing Islamic extremist organization.

What we do know about the Boston Marathon bombers is that both their family members and their local Mosque rejected the extremist views of the eldest brother, Tamerlan Tsarnaev. In fact, just three months ago, Tamerlan was kicked out of the local mosque because the imam mentioned Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. in a sermon. While I’m not a psychologist, this rejection leads me to the lone wolves conclusions. Nonetheless, the right-wing continues their attacks on dark skinned people and Muslims in general with broad sweeping allegations of evildoing.

It just so happens we had a second domestic terrorist attack in the U.S. this week. Kevin Curtis allegedly sent Mississippi Senator Roger Wicker and President Obama ricin laced letters. While Glenn Beck was stoking the flames of bigotry this week toward Arabs over the Boston Marathon bombings, at the same time the right-wing bigot machine was quick to label the White homegrown gun-owning Christian terrorist’s behavior as “mindboggling”.

As the two domestic terrorists stories unfold in the upcoming weeks it will be important to note the disparate narratives the media will tell of the two accounts. Unlike the Tsarnaev brothers, the right-wing will find ever excuse in the world to send Curtis off to the loony bin without ever deeply examining the roots of Curtis’ political ideology, support for gun ownership, belief in common right-wing anti-government conspiracy theories, and most importantly his devotional belief in Jesus Christ.

While members of both the Curtis and Tsarnaev families talk about their deranged relatives having mental illness issues, the Tsarnaev’s religious beliefs will clearly become the overwhelming narrative around for the Boston Marathon bombing. As for the Curtis case, most likely religion will become a non-issue. And while the religious bias will be most obvious in the right-wing main-stream media and blogging community, we should not be surprised if the same bigoted narrative plays out in the rest of the main-stream media outlets.

UPDATE: Charges were dropped against Kevin Curtis on Tuesday, April 23,2013.

Parents Increasingly Turning to Federal Courts for Civil Rights Protections

Sun, 21 Apr 2013 09:15:28 -0500

Imagine you are in a divorce. You’ve been a dedicated parent and you aren’t a convicted felon or being accused of a crime. Now imagine walking into a local court for a procedural hearing and in a single decree your children are banned from seeing you, speaking to you or communicating in any way based solely on hearsay and allegation. Nothing’s been proven, no due process has occurred to prove anything yet a capricious judge has made a snap decision that changes the rest of your life and your children’s. What would you do?

Unfortunately this scenario is the real life experience of thousands of families across the country. An overzealous or biased Judge makes a snap decision that takes away the most important things in our lives. Whether or not you were the one seeking divorce there’s very little that parents who find themselves in this situation can do. Even when children are banned ‘temporarily’ from their parents, months can drag on to years between court dates and there’s no pause button in life. Milestones go by, alienation grows, bitterness increases and worst of all children experience immense pain and loss. Surprisingly most states have no provisions to intervene when children are banned from their parents yet this is one of the cruelest punishments that a court can levy.

While the US Constitution gives the powers of marriage, divorce and adoption to state civil courts, state civil courts simply ignore their obligations to support the civil rights protections of parents as held in the US Constitution. Parents who can’t afford attorneys can lose their children fighting spouses with access to legal assistance. Children who are the ones ‘protected’ have no say in bizarre custody decisions. Evidence standards are non-existent in family courts in the USA so children can be taken from parents purely on accusation. However, since many courts receive federal aid and recent Supreme Court cases like Turner vs. Rogers have reinforced the concept of due process in divorce many parents are turning to federal courts to seek restoration of their parental rights based on civil rights arguments.

As parent Gary Treistman of Ulster County, New York who recently filed a civil rights suit against New York says, “Losing access to my children for no crime or proven allegations is a violation of my civil rights and my children’s civil rights.” Treistman continues, “I’ve not been convicted of any crime or any wrongdoing, yet a civil court is punishing me and my children more harshly than a criminal court could for most any crime based entirely on hearsay and unsupported accusations.” Treistman knows he has an uphill battle but like so many other parents seeking civil rights protections in divorce he has no other recourse. Treistman is hoping that the Federal Courts will uphold his child’s civil rights to due process and that Title 42 laws will allow him to seek retribution from New York State for taking his children away for years without due process or substantive cause.

As M says, a mother from New York who recently lost her children for no logical reason, “removing my child is the greatest punishment a court could impose yet due process is ignored and I have nowhere to appeal.” As the primary care giver for her young child M was shocked when a Judge made the snap decision to temporarily remove her daughter from custody based on vague and unproven allegations. In M’s case, like so many others in New York and elsewhere the Judge imposed an extra layer of cruelty by forcing the former stay-at-home mom to have her visits supervised. But with ‘visitation’ costing over $200 an hour and visits limited to only a few hours M finds it impossible to maintain a relationship with her young child and her child is under tremendous psychological stress from the situation.

After thirty appearances in Family Court that have led nowhere M decided to file suit in Federal Court for violation of her constitutional rights to due process and parental rights to protect her child. As M states, “Legal Guardians, custody evaluators and attorneys have tremendous unchecked power in New York without the protections of due process we are led to believe we have as Americans.” One baseless allegation to an irritated Judge from a connected attorney can lead to life-shattering decisions that are near impossible to change. With no jury or effective supervision of the courtroom behavior of judges or custody evaluators recommending such harsh punishments families have no guarantees of due process. Once the tables are turned against a parent and child by a Judge, legal guardians or custody evaluators there are no checks and balances ensuring the integrity of the cruel and unusual punishments that family courts can decree.

Though M is realistic about Federal Courts jurisdiction she wants change in the system as much as she wants relief from the pain of being separated from her child. “It’s my hope that this federal complaint will protect parents from their right to fair and speedy trial and raise awareness of the cruel punishments parents face without due process in cases where there are no signs of abuse.” It’s near impossible for children and parents who are banned from each other to contain their emotions in terse, supervised meetings yet New York officials notate every remark, touch, tear and comment and tend to use emotion against the banned parent. M hopes her appeal for due process for both her and her daughter will force New York State to look at evidence and not base their decision on hearsay. After thirty appearances in family and supreme court M has little hope to regaining a normal relationship with her child.

While some parents are seeking civil rights protections under the 14^th Amendment and others are seeking compensation for unjust actions under Title 42, still others are seeking RICO prosecutions against groups of attorneys, judges and court appointed experts who work together to bankrupt families. As New York parent Gary says “the assigned Attorney for Child in my case coerced payments from me without providing accounting of her work, or representing my child’s wishes.” Since legal guardians are supposedly critical representatives for children’s legal rights, by refusing to work when payment wasn’t possible Gary and parents like him face tremendous punishments for not being able to pay expensive court-ordered divorce professionals.

In New York for example, where both parents must file for sole custody, the costs of court ordered experts can exceed $50,000 including custody evaluators, guardians and attorney’s fees. Parents who can’t afford to pay find themselves without their children. When groups of judges, experts and attorneys repeatedly work as teams to use child custody as the basis for huge fees that bankrupt families, some parents believe that there is basis for RICO prosecutions. Since the local courts are not bound by due process and ethics enforcement of judges, attorneys and experts is near non-existent groups of divorce professionals can easily use the court system and custody as tools of extortion. Unfortunately for parents, criminal RICO statutes must be brought forth by the US Government and the US Government is unwilling to review the business practices of the divorce industry in many states.

Many parents who face the cruel and unusual punishment of parental rights termination have turned to activism to raise awareness to the lack of civil rights that families encounter in family courts in America. For example, Greg Roberts started the Family Civil Liberties Union (fclu.org) to help parents fight unjust removal of their parental rights. As Roberts’ website accurately states, “Once in the family court system, it can be years and hundreds of thousands of dollars before an average family emerges from the system – broken, slandered, extorted, exploited and forever damaged beyond repair.” Roberts sees the family court system as “sanctioned corruption” that creates “conflict for cash” with no regard for the civil rights of the children or parents involved.

As Roberts site points out, the ACLU and other civil rights organizations turn a blind eye to the atrocious violations of civil rights that middle class families face in family courts. Generally speaking the victims of family courts have enough money to pay attorneys for some time and are religious, heterosexual and often times not minorities. The ACLU is aware of the civil rights abuses that families face in family courts and they have acted on behalf of one family in Montana that they publicize on the ACLU website, however, this was a gay relationship which is an area that is a traditional focus of the ACLU. The ACLU is unwilling to aid middle-class Americans and children even though hundreds of thousands of children see their lives destroyed each year in family courts devoid of due process protections.

Some insight can be garnered on the US Government’s position on the civil rights of families in the refusal of the US to join UNICEF’s Convention on the Rights of the Child. The United States is the only member state of the UN besides South Sudan and Somalia to not ratify this act. This act “combines a right to protection through the State, parents and relevant institutions with the recognition that the child is a holder of participatory rights and freedoms,” states UNICEF. This act acknowledges parents as the primary care givers of a child and vastly limits the cases where a child can be removed from a parent. Since many parents are removed for capricious reasons, this statement from Article 2 of the act would give parents a strong basis to fight unfair removal of custody. ‘States Parties shall take all appropriate measures to ensure that the child is protected against all forms of discrimination or punishment on the basis of the status, activities, expressed opinions, or beliefs of the child's parents, legal guardians, or family members.’ Interestingly enough, many of the conservative groups who lobby hard for the rights of the unborn child oppose this bill and the civil rights of living children because they feel that it will provide basis to interfere with home schooling.

In April, 2013 Russia, in a retaliatory action against the United States, banned a list of important US figures from Russia on the basis of human rights violations. Interestingly enough Russia chose to ban the US Attorney from Southern New York, Preet Bharara. While the reasoning for Mr. Bharara’s ban was not related to children’s civil rights Mr. Bharara and other US Attorneys should rightly be called out for not protecting the civil rights of children. The US Attorney’s office is well aware of the collusion and civil rights abuses that are commonplace in US family courts but because of the deep political protections of the Divorce Industry in most states, the Justice Department is uninterested in protecting the civil rights of children and families in the face of a powerful industry lobby.

The parent-child relationship is sacred and deep and should be defended as strongly as any basic human right but sadly, even though these rights have been explicitly recognized by the U.S. Supreme Court, in the United States and in New York in particular, poorly supervised lower courts and agencies use children as extortion tools for a predatory divorce industry. States have proven themselves unable and unwilling to protect the civil rights of children and families so parents are forced to go to federal courts to protect basic civil rights. The US Government has precedential authority to intervene in local courts to protect the civil rights of the unprotected as they’ve done for minorities, women the disabled and others. It’s time for the US to act for the sake of our children to provide due process and civil rights protections in divorce and child custody. No child should be banned from a parent except in the most extreme circumstances, and it’s time to stand up for the rights of children.

I began the article by asking you to imagine being a parent who has just lost their kids unexpectedly in a mundane and terse court hearing. Now imagine yourself as a young child who is suddenly told by a court that your parent is a bad person and harmful, though they’ve never committed a crime and have been your loving supporter. What would you do?

Sources and further reading:

www.tinyurl.com/UlsterFederalLawsuit

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4vekDOd1u7g

http://www.fclu.org

http://www.aclu.org/lgbt-rights/montana-high-court-affirms-rights-lesbian-parent-and-her-children

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turner_v._Rogers

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20014613-503544.html

http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/amendmentxiv

http://www.nydivorceconsultants.com