Government Permission Required For Parents To Kiss

[pduffy4]

Government Permission Required For Parents To Kiss There Own Children!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

http://prisonplanet.com/articles/june2008/062608_government_permission.htm

How much more of this shit is there going to be and what the FUCK is going on!:mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::eek::eek::eek::e ek:

[Anders Lindman]

What will the next step be? Government video cameras in the parents' home to ensure better child protection? :confused:

[ownedtbh]

lmao this has to be a joke.

[john white]

NO

Its not a fucking joke

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/2194359/A-quarter-of-adults-to-face-%27anti-paedophile%27-tests.html

A quarter of adults to face 'anti-paedophile' tests

A quarter of adults to face 'anti-paedophile' testsA quarter of the adult population faces an "anti-paedophile" test in an escalation of child protection policies, according to a report.

The launch of a new Government agency will see 11.3million people vetted for any criminal past before they are approved to have contact with children aged under 16.

But the increase in child protection measures is so great it is "poisoning" relationships between the generations, according to respected sociologist Professor Frank Furedi.

In a report for think tank Civitas, he said the use of criminal records bureau checks to ensure the safety of children and vulnerable adults has created an atmosphere of suspicion.

As a result ordinary parents - many of whom are volunteers at sports and social clubs - now find themselves regarded "potential child abusers".

The checks were introduced to tighten procedures to protect children after school caretaker Ian Huntley murdered 10 year olds Jessica Chapman and Holly Wells in Soham in 2002.

However, there are growing fears that the measures have now gone too far.

Professor Furedi said most adults now think twice before telling off children who were misbehaving, or helping children in distress for fear of the consequences.

He said that the need for the checks had transformed parents "in the regulatory and public imagination into potential child abusers, barred from any contact with children until the database gives them the green light".

From next year the new Independent Safeguarding Authority will require any adult who come into contact with children or vulnerable adults either through their work or in voluntary groups to be vetted.

But Prof Furedi's report, Licensed to Hug, highlighted examples of when adult-child relationships were distorted by the need for CRB checks already being required by schools and other organisations.

In one example, a woman could not kiss her daughter goodbye on a school trip because she had not been vetted.

In another, a mother was surprised to be told by another parent that she and her husband were "CRB checked" when their children played together.

In a third example, a father was given "filthy looks" by a group of mothers when he took his child swimming on his own in "a scene from a Western when the room goes silent and tumbleweed blows across the foreground".

Prof Furedi details how one woman was made to feel like a "second class mother" because she was barred from a school disco because she did not have a CRB check.

Prof Furedi, a sociology professor from Kent University, said that "adults are no longer trusted or expected to engage with children on their own initiative".

He said: "When parents feel in need of official reassurance that other parents have passed the paedophile test before they even start on the pleasantries, something has gone badly wrong in our communities.

"We should question whether there is anything healthy in a response where communities look at children's own fathers with suspicion, but would balk at helping a lost child find their way home."

Prof Furedi, the author of a book called "Paranoid Parenting", said there was a trend to treat parenthood as a "professional endeavour that demanded increasing regulation and monitoring".

Prof Furedi said that CRB checks did not "provide anything like a cast-iron guarantee that children will be safe with a particular adult".

"All it tells us is that the person has not been convicted of an offence in the past," he said.

He called for a national review to demonstrate the need to "improve and clarify adult authority".

Prof Furedi said: "The adult qualities of spontaneous compassion and commitment are far more effective safeguarding methods than pieces of paper that promote the messages 'Keep Out' and 'Watch Your Back'."

Figures show that volunteering is on the decline with 13 per cent of men saying they would not volunteer because they were worried people would think they were child abusers, according to a survey last year.

The report comes after Children's Commissioner, Sir Al Aynsley Green, said 50,000 girls were waiting to join the Guides because of a shortage of adult volunteers, partly caused by the red tape of the CRB process.

Martin Narey, chief executive of children's charity Barnardo's, said his behaviour had been affected by the suspicions around adult-child relationships.

Writing in The New Statesman, he says: "I am likely to usher my wife forward if a child falls over in the street, lest my picking up the child could be misinterpreted. We need to address that. Adults - particularly men - should not routinely be seen as potential child abusers.

"And we need urgently to expose the nonsense of 'stranger danger' and convince parents that, although the risk of a child of theirs being abused at all is small, that risk comes not from lurking strangers, but from people known by their children - often relatives - who are able to exploit a child's trust."

However, he stressed that not to run any checks on past behaviour that could point to potential abuse would be "scandalously reckless" and he supported plans for the new Independent Safeguarding Authority whose work he said "will restore parental confidence" in adults who volunteer to help groups like the Scouts.

The CRB said yesterday that it will process 3.6million checks this year - up from 3.4million last year - of which 20 per cent were for volunteers.

Vince Gaskell, the bureau's chief executive, said he did not believe that CRB checks were poisoning the relationship between adults and children.

[mrguitarbear]

This is quite , quite insane isn't it ?

[homebrew1973]

Sheer bloody lunacy it is :( Why don`t they go the whole hog and make it illegal for parents to give any love and affection to their children? Or have they done that already?

[Anders Lindman]

Governments are going more and more insane. Paranoia against the people run rampant. WTF is going on? 'Safety', 'security', 'national security' etc are terms used as a blanket excuse for implementing more and more Orwellian control. Why? :confused:

Except for an ongoing NWO agenda I think that many people actually believe more and more surveillance and control creates a better society. The slightest promise of increased security and the sheeple will follow.

[kweli]

FFS!! This is some of the most sickening 'news' I've read in a long time.

[Ian2day]

I'm wondering if the facts have been twisted to create a good story. When you read sentences taken out of context. It is easy to react in a way the author wants you to react.

[phaid]

I think that the question which has to be asked is 'who is going to be the person who is so far beyond suspicion themselves that they can stand in judgement over others, particularly in cases of 'morality'?'

I always thought this when I considered the British Board of Film Censors who would vet and award certificates to films, even banning some on the grounds of possibly offending public decency or similar claim.
How come they weren't or couldn't be 'corrupted' themselves? They saw the films and went home without murdering or raping anyone else, so how come the rest of us couldn't be trusted to see the film either?
What made them so superior?

Now who will be the judges in these paedophilia checks? How come they're beyond suspicion themselves? Who vetted them?
It goes on forever into absurd looping/Russian Doll/infinite regress situations

[informationx]

Psychological warfare. The child belongs to the state etc. Anything needs permission even a show of affection and love to your own child.


In one example, a woman could not kiss her daughter goodbye on a school trip because she had not been vetted.

The parent of her own child does NOT need permission from the state to show/or not show affection to her own child.

The Government organisation is linked below.

http://www.isa-gov.org.uk/default.aspx

[romas]

I think that the question which has to be asked is 'who is going to be the person who is so far beyond suspicion themselves that they can stand in judgement over others, particularly in cases of 'morality'?'

I always thought this when I considered the British Board of Film Censors who would vet and award certificates to films, even banning some on the grounds of possibly offending public decency or similar claim.
How come they weren't or couldn't be 'corrupted' themselves? They saw the films and went home without murdering or raping anyone else, so how come the rest of us couldn't be trusted to see the film either?
What made them so superior?

Now who will be the judges in these paedophilia checks? How come they're beyond suspicion themselves? Who vetted them?
It goes on forever into absurd looping/Russian Doll/infinite regress situations



Great questions, indeed it's interesting how sheeple are able to accept anything thrown at them by commercial Phd's and MD's

smoke and mirrors.

[pduffy4]

The Government organisation is linked below.

http://www.isa-gov.org.uk/default.aspx


Thanks for the link. I found this interesting from thier FAQ

Question -
Will people be able to opt out of the ISA Scheme?

Answer -
No - not while working or volunteering with children and/or vulnerable adults as it will be an offence to do so without being registered by the ISA.
Should an individual no longer wish to work or volunteer in a regulated capacity then they may opt out of the scheme by writing to the ISA. However, if that person decided at a later stage to re-enter regulated activity then they would be required to re-register, as the ISA would not have been monitoring them while they were out of the scheme.

I would like to e-mail these fuckers the link to the article on Prison Planet . com but I expect they would have the site shut down. I fucking hate and dispise these bastard beasts! In the USA the equivalent of the Child Protection Services are paid and financial BONUS for each child they take from their parents for something as minor as the child faling off their bike.

As for these bastard THINK TANKS there was one evil man from one of these who said parents should have the right to kill their child in the first 12 months of life if they decided they did not want to keep the child!!!! I am trying to find the link to the story about this but I have over 1,000 links in my "New World Order" favourites folder, will post it if I get it.

Check this out-
Go Directly to Jail: The Criminalization of Almost Everything.
http://www.catostore.org/index.asp?fa=ProductDetails&method=cats&scid=33&pid=1441226

[kingmonkey]

I think that the question which has to be asked is 'who is going to be the person who is so far beyond suspicion themselves that they can stand in judgement over others, particularly in cases of 'morality'?'

I always thought this when I considered the British Board of Film Censors who would vet and award certificates to films, even banning some on the grounds of possibly offending public decency or similar claim.
How come they weren't or couldn't be 'corrupted' themselves? They saw the films and went home without murdering or raping anyone else, so how come the rest of us couldn't be trusted to see the film either?
What made them so superior?

Now who will be the judges in these paedophilia checks? How come they're beyond suspicion themselves? Who vetted them?
It goes on forever into absurd looping/Russian Doll/infinite regress situations

Exactly, It's that old freemason way of thinking...The masses can't be trusted, us of a higher standing should take them in hand...For their own good of course.

[john white]

It's worth pointing out that, as usual, Prison Planet article titles do need to be put through the propoganda filter. The actual material is not directly saying Parents need to be CRB'd becuase they are Parents (though that is an logical extension of where this trend is headed), but that people who are parents need to be CRB checked to take part in activities with children who might be there own

However, lets pick out key statments from the telegraph article and its clear where the social engineering has been taking us


A quarter of adults to face 'anti-paedophile' tests

the use of criminal records bureau checks to ensure the safety of children and vulnerable adults has created an atmosphere of suspicion.

As a result ordinary parents - many of whom are volunteers at sports and social clubs - now find themselves regarded "potential child abusers".


Professor Furedi said most adults now think twice before telling off children who were misbehaving, or helping children in distress for fear of the consequences.

the need for the checks had transformed parents "in the regulatory and public imagination into potential child abusers, barred from any contact with children until the database gives them the green light".

From next year the new Independent Safeguarding Authority will require any adult who come into contact with children or vulnerable adults either through their work or in voluntary groups to be vetted. (extending this inteference into leasure time as well as work activities JW)

"adults are no longer trusted or expected to engage with children on their own initiative".

parents feel in need of official reassurance = something has gone badly wrong in our communities.

"We should question whether there is anything healthy in a response where communities look at children's own fathers with suspicion, but would balk at helping a lost child find their way home."

"Paranoid Parenting" =a trend to treat parenthood as a "professional endeavour that demanded increasing regulation and monitoring".

adult qualities of spontaneous compassion and commitment are far more effective safeguarding methods than pieces of paper that promote the messages 'Keep Out' and 'Watch Your Back'."

volunteering is on the decline


I am likely to usher my wife forward if a child falls over in the street, lest my picking up the child could be misinterpreted. We need to address that. Adults - particularly men - should not routinely be seen as potential child abusers.

It's the State as Big Daddy: and what is big daddy doing out of sight behind our backs?

[kweli]

Psychological warfare. The child belongs to the state etc. Anything needs permission even a show of affection and love to your own child.

Quote:
In one example, a woman could not kiss her daughter goodbye on a school trip because she had not been vetted.

The parent of her own child does NOT need permission from the state to show/or not show affection to her own child.

The Government organisation is linked below.

http://www.isa-gov.org.uk/default.aspx

Spot on!

[informationx]

It's the State as Big Daddy: and what is big daddy doing out of sight behind our backs?

That made me giggle john. Big daddy sounds like a friendly warm chap who looks after your hamster while you were on holiday. :D

[john white]

That made me giggle john. Big daddy sounds like a friendly warm chap who looks after your hamster while you were on holiday. :D

Only if your being good: Big Daddy is cruel when he is angry, and theres no-one to care for Sammy Squeeker then!

[informationx]

Leave my poor hammy alone big daddy! lol

http://img.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2007/09_03/HamsterREX_468x362.jpg

[pduffy4]

FOUND IT

Here is a quote [I refered to] The best-known proponent of such views is Peter Singer. He is world famous (or infamous) for advocating that parents should have a period of time to decide whether to keep or kill their newborn infants. His support for infanticide is founded on personhood theory. Since infants aren't persons, he believes, they are "replaceable" -- and hence killable -- like all other "non self-conscious animals." Thus, he has written, in "Practical Ethics": "Since neither a newborn infant nor a fish is a person, the wrongness of killing such beings is not as great as the wrongness of killing a person."

Here is the link-
http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/index.php?command=view&id=1179

[informationx]

FOUND IT

Here is a quote [I refered to] The best-known proponent of such views is Peter Singer. He is world famous (or infamous) for advocating that parents should have a period of time to decide whether to keep or kill their newborn infants. His support for infanticide is founded on personhood theory. Since infants aren't persons, he believes, they are "replaceable" -- and hence killable -- like all other "non self-conscious animals." Thus, he has written, in "Practical Ethics": "Since neither a newborn infant nor a fish is a person, the wrongness of killing such beings is not as great as the wrongness of killing a person."

Here is the link-
http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/index.php?command=view&id=1179

I call people like him intellectual masturbaters, let him do his masturbating in private. No one wants to see them in public though.

[the itinerant shrubber]

Thats pretty funny. Like everything else,this crap can only work if people go along with it. Tell them to fuck off-problem solved.
Of course,if you do just cow-tail to it,you're a pathetic worm and deserve everything coming to you anyway.

[homebrew1973]

That made me giggle john. Big daddy sounds like a friendly warm chap who looks after your hamster while you were on holiday. :D

Not if said hamster was a fan of Giant Haystacks :D Who remembers World of Sport in the 80s? ;)

[the itinerant shrubber]

Not if said hamster was a fan of Giant Haystacks :D Who remembers World of Sport in the 80s? ;)

Oh yes. Me gran was convinced it was real. Used to get right carried away.

[phaid]

Not if said hamster was a fan of Giant Haystacks :D Who remembers World of Sport in the 80s? ;)
'Welcome grapple fans....'
Great stuff.
:p

[sven]

If you really want to know what this is about and i think you may do already READ THIS http://www.erichufschmid.net/TFC/Tavistock.html and weep.

[lightgiver]

You do not have to listen to these idiots,

do what you think is right and stop listening to these crazy elitists scum:rolleyes:;)

and that peter scumbag singer needs to go and do one with evil views like that,

innit funny you never come across these idiots,because if i ever come across any of these NWO scumbags and pete scumbag singer ,WATCH OUT.......

[upsetbrit]

It's these 'think tanks' again. They need to be outlawed and made to answer!

[Anders Lindman]

"A quarter of the population must take "anti-paedophile" tests to have contact with children"

This is like order out of chaos. It's really not a true solution to the problem of pedophilia. It doesn't solve the root problem. It keeps the understanding of pedophilia in a confused state. It doesn't answer the why pedophilia happens.

If this insanity goes on we WILL soon have total Orwellian control.

It's an oppressive blanket kind of control that will never solve the root problems in society. Therefore the politicians can add oppressive law after law after law... Maybe that's what they want? :eek: Say hello to the New World (dis)Order.

[free thinker]

fuck what the government says....since when did they represent public opinion?
:(

[montag]

It's the State as Big Daddy: and what is big daddy doing out of sight behind our backs?
The message is we can't even trust ourselves let alone our neighbours so we need the government to monitor all of our activities for our own safety.

The problem with big government is that it is constantly needing to justify it's existence, so with the nearly complete deregulation of big business and free trade they've turned their attention to us the people to regulate instead, smoking, obesity, child care, bicycle helmets, you name it if they're not already on to it they soon will be.

[ice9]

Perversely maybe we need more of these insane laws - they may act like cattle prods and start waking people up...

[danielg]

Ironically, or hypocritically, there is a book, I can't find it on this library internet as the word pederasty is filtered, by, I think Jermey Bentham, or similar, who are the ideological fathers of the current crazies like Brown and Blair; The book promotes pederasty, and they're coming out with this shit. Fucking crazies.
But we must thank them for exposing themselves and digging their own graves.

[disorder2k8]

Kissing your daughter good night? Not before you fill out form 116b, sign it in triplicate and have 1 copy sent to your government home advisor, you dirty, filthy pervert.

- From the office of the homeland security.



Causing trouble? Then guards will bring me the paperwork I need to fill in to have you requested to be taken away. Who's your daddy now!?

- From the office of the homeland security.

[romas]

Yeah to keep you busy so you don't bother figuring their 'great' plans.

Dropping bombs on brown peoples children and then imposing sanctions to kill all those who didn't die from bombs and radiation through starvation, what a great moral authority to listen to eh?

[skyline]

Dear Government


I Understand kissing now requires permission so with this new legislation in mind I hereby give you persmission to kiss my arse.I might like to add I have gorged on Jalapeno peppers for the last week

I cant be held responsible for any burns that may result in you puckering up to my kitchen tea towel holder and wish not to be sued for any third degree burns that your members may suffer but the law is the law so I give you fair warning and permission

[lightgiver]

dear Government


I Understand Kissing Now Requires Permission So With This New Legislation In Mind I Hereby Give You Persmission To Kiss My Arse.i Might Like To Add I Have Gorged On Jalapeno Peppers For The Last Week

I Cant Be Held Responsible For Any Burns That May Result In You Puckering Up To My Kitchen Tea Towel Holder And Wish Not To Be Sued For Any Third Degree Burns That Your Members May Suffer But The Law Is The Law So I Give You Fair Warning And Permission

Ha Ha Ha :D:D:D