"Gerechtigkeit und Frieden sind Geschwister Erfolgsfaktoren sozialdemokratischer Globalisierungsgestaltung im 21. Jahrhundert"
Stadtname / PLZ
Di, 12.09.2017 11:45
pts20170912019 Politics/Law, Health/Medicine
The Dirty War on Children in Europe
Psychological Warfare to Destabilize Society (Part 2)
Klagenfurt/Madison, Wisconsin (pts019/12.09.2017/11:45) - This series of publications presents a critical examination of child abduction by the youth office in the context of an obvious destabilization policy. The introduction is in part 1: http://www.pressetext.com/news/20170725023 . In part 2 the association "Victims Mission" reports the fate of a family living in Klagenfurt (Carinthia/Austria):
Catherine and Joe Stone have been married for 11 years and have three children: Kai * (11 years), Anna * (9 years) and Sascha * (4 years). Sascha is currently visiting the maternal grandparents in the USA. Joe is an Austrian citizen with Turkish roots. Catherine is a US citizen. Both speak German and are well integrated. The three children have Austrian and US-American citizenship. On the basis of untrue allegations, the older children were removed from school and placed in another home in May 2017. The responsible social worker is Ms. Mag. P. of the Klagenfurt child welfare office. Together with lawyer Dr. Farhad Paya, the tireless champion of fundamental, human and children's rights, the family has been striving since then to have the children returned. On September 4, 2008, Dr. Paya writes  to the District Court of Klagenfurt:
On 24 August 2017 in the afternoon the children's parents exercised the right granted them by the child welfare office to contact their children for only 45 minutes. After about a half hour, Mag. P. explained that the parents' visit to their children had ended, since the parents were not allowed to speak English to their children, to speak of America or of the children's grandparents. Ms. Mag. P. [..] gave no reason for these prohibitions. When the children's parents declared that they wished to continue to exercise the right to visitation, in accordance with the agreement, until the end of the 3/4 hour, Mag. P.[..] called the police, who, by order of Ms. Mag. P.[..], and in the presence of the minor children, brutally intervened and forced the children's father, Joe Stone, out by twisting his arm, while Ms. P. [..] forcibly removed the minor K.[..], who had been clinging to his father. Likewise, the minor A, who clung to her mother, was inhumanly and forcibly torn away by the employees of the child welfare office. The police officers, 5 or 6 officials, took Joe Stone to the next room, where they placed him against the wall and hit his head against it, bending his hands so far back that he screamed in pain. They also hit him on the back and the lower legs. There are video recordings of this brutal action of the child welfare office and the police, from which the heartbreaking cries of the children can also be heard ...
Here, the instruments of power show how they assert their exclusive claim to power with brute force. The extreme despair that caused the children to attempt to return to the family suggests that the children had already been severely manipulated and put under pressure where they had been placed. The odds were against the weeping children, who wished to go home with their parents, and so they lost an unfair fight. They are heartlessly sent back into their new, strange acommodation. The shocked parents leave the child welfare office building. Their father, Joe, who is in extreme pain, goes to a hospital. The visit between loving and beloved parents and their loving and beloved children is over.
Dr. Paya also writes in his statement to the court: After this incident, in order to punish the children(!) the child welfare office rescinded the right to visit and brought the children to the halfway house F. [...], knowing that the children's parents have no access to a vehicle, so that they should hardly be able to exercise any right to visitation.
Dr. Paya also reports to the court that the youth office provides no information on the course or treatment of Anna's illness, which first occurred in foster care. The attorney continues: "The child welfare office's representatives' course of action is an obvious case of pure harassment to demonstrate its power over the children... The representatives of the child welfare office do not mention the traumatization of the two children by the actions of the child welfare office, but apparently intends to alienate the children from their parents. Such actions are not conducive to children's well-being.
Dr. Paya writes further: "By prohibiting the parents from speaking their native tongue, namely English, with their children, and from speaking of America and the maternal grandparents, the child welfare office ... does not ... allow a close contact between the children and their parents. The parents of the children may only say what is approved by the representatives of the child welfare office or the Ms. P [...]. Such action is not permitted even in prison. This proceeding on the part of the child welfare office severely infringes both the children's and their parents' rights to private- and family life legally protected by article 8 of the ECHR."
In another document of 4 September 2017 , Dr. Paya complains i. a., that the administration does not deliver important documents such as motions and statements to the children's parents: "This was a violation of constitutional rights ut audiatur et altera pars guaranteed the children's parents."
In 2010, the Stones moved from the USA to Austria, so that the children could see foreign countries and learn new languages. As soon as they arrive, the family has to fight the bureaucratic hurdles. Catherine receives the visa for Austria only after three years. The family is confronted with hatred of foreigners, they are insulted and hear people shouting, "foreigners out!" In 2012, Mr. Stone turns to the child welfare office, which organizes a new apartment for the family, so that they hope to be able to escape ostracism.
At the elementary school in Klagenfurt the two older children are harassed by teachers. The school, and especially certain teachers, have been well known for such behaviour for years.
The standard procedure for child abduction has remained the same since the 1940's: children are first selected, second bullied at school, third taken away by the child welfare office, under false allegations against the family, and finally drugged, manipulated and alienated from their families. Loving relatives are discredited, slandered and eliminated. They are only in the way of the intentions of the administration: no other PSYOPS (*) and no other False-Flags (*) are more effective in family destruction and thus the destabilization of civil society.
The Stones seek to discuss the matter with the school and the authorities, but find no relief for their children, who come home from school crying again and again. The school even sends the police to the house to intimidate them and trumps up a false report. The police later admit this to the parents. All of a sudden, the Stones get no more appointments, neither at city hall, nor with the regional government, nor with the municipality. If they want to audition without an appointment, they are rejected with the argument "Make an appointment" ... The city councillor in charge has known the Stones for years. His children go to the same school. He, too, is no longer available to speak with the Stone family.
On May 11, 2017, Dr. A. M. of the school medical service writes to the Landespolizeidirektion Kärnten (Kriminalreferat) "The boy reports that ... several hand blows had been administered to his head ... The boy reports that the father ... would come, to hit with a big stick ... was beaten on the head with the stick ... kicks and punches to various body regions ... head ... upper body ... back. The boy reports and illustrates the defensive movements with which he attempts to ward off the impacts of the blows from the stick, whereby he is repeatedly hit on the edges of his forearms, but although he complains that both forearm edges hurt him, no hematomas visible here ... ". If the edges of his forearms had been hit repeatedly, not only blue, but also multi-colored spots would be seen, also swellings, bumps and bruises. However, the doctor notes: "No hematomas visible." Apart from a blue spot, the doctor does not notice any injuries to the child's body at all!
The doctor also writes that Kai is anxious, nervous, whiny ... Why was Mr. Stone not immediately apprehended under such serious accusations, when the school and child welfare office otherwise never hesitate to call the police? Why were such allegations never judicially clarified? Was Kai manipulated in school and foster care in such a way that he made such statements because he saw no other way out? Or were such words put into his mouth? Was he forced? Was he pressured with false promises? Was he under the influence of psychotropic medication? Why do the authorities hide in silence?
The Stone parents know: "Kai's personality has changed completely, and the joyful, alert and intelligent child has become a deeply sad and desperate child."
Now the parents also know that their 11-year-old son Kai has been abused by his teacher for years: yelling at the child, putting him down in front of the other pupils and calling him as a liar, ridiculing him, insulting him etc. belonged to the teacher's favourite practices. What the children are allowed or required to say is prescribed by the school ... In light of this, the statement in the discharge letter of the Children's Psychiatry Klagenfurt of 20 June 2017  seems peculiar: "K. [Kai] has been with his sister A. [ Anna] in the KIZ [Crisis Intervention Center] since 11 May 2017 as part of an emergency measure after Kai had confided to a teacher that his father beat him and his sister. And further: Kai comes out of the KIZ Klagenfurt after an escalation in which Kai began to throw things." "Adaptation disorders" are diagnosed in the 11-year-old ... Why should Kai "trust a teacher"? He was bullied at school and was afraid of his teacher. Why is the child's healthy protest against his forced isolation in a home represented as a disease? Why do Austrian authorities find everything - including the compulsory placement of underage children under psychiatric treatment - better than allowing the children to live in peace with parents and siblings? Hundreds of such cases are known from Austria alone and thousands throughout Europe ...
On 18 May 2017, Ms. Mag. P. writes to the District Court of Klagenfurt  on page 2: "... Mr Stone reported numerous conflicts with different authorities, neighbours and schools. The father sees the causes ...in discrimination based on his ethical origin. " Apart from the fact that Mrs Mag. P. confuses "ethical origin" with "ethnic origin", she insinuates that Mr. Stone is a troublemaker and thus exhibits what is possibly paranoid disease pattern. In Austria this accusation is often levelled against people who openly express their critical opinions. Joe Stone was the CEO of a thriving company and he knows his right to freedom of expression.
Ms. Mag. P. continues with her general defamation of the Stone parents, writing to the court: "There is currently no communication with the family Stone, as the parents, according to the school, are not allowed to come to the school personally as of 4 March 2017. This house ban, according to the school, is due to an assault by the children's mother against a teacher, and according to the Director, a lawsuit was filed at the appropriate court for assault and libel." Catherine Stone states: "I neither touched the teacher, nor threatened her in any way, and I certainly did not attack her. On the contrary, the teacher behaved aggressively toward me." If there had been a "physical attack," the school would not have hesitated to turn to the police. The attack is fictitious.
As regards the alleged violence of Mr. Stone, Dr. Farhad Paya, Stone's lawyer writes to the court on 31 July 2017 , page 3: "Thus, even the public prosecutor's office did not find the allegations on the basis of the complaints made to them sufficient for a criminal case ... These allegations are based on the statements of a teacher whose behaviour is characterized by an anti-foreigner attitude, and who has constantly put down the minor, K. [Kai] Stone, in class before the other children and made fun of him on the basis of his language barriers ... ".
On 29 June 2017, Ms. Mag. P. writes another letter to the court  and notes of Kai: "The minor has increasingly shown a self-displacing [selbstversetzend] behaviour ..."; here, Ms Mag. P. may again have fallen into error and probably meant "self-injurious" [selbstverletzend]. She writes further about Kai that he "pulls his hair, strikes objects, beats himself ... so that ... arrangements were made for in-patient care at the Klagenfurt Clinic." The possibility of ending the child's desperate acts by going home to his family is unthinkable for the family wreckers.
In the next paragraph, Ms. P. departs from her construct that Kai would need psychiatric treatment, and accuses the parents again: "As the child's parents remain in disagreement with the paedagogical measures already taken ... the temporary emergency placement at the NPKJ ["child psychiatric facility"] of the child and youth welfare institution on 28 June 2017 is necessary." The logic of why a child is locked up in a psychiatric clinic because his parents do not agree to his placement in foster care speaks for itself.
Lawyer Dr. Paya submits applications, notices, statements etc. to the court, such as one on 31 July 2017: "The two children are desperate and in bad mental condition because of this compulsory separation. The children are badly traumatized by these measures. This procedure of the youth office does not conduce to the child's well-being ... The child welfare office has been unable to clarify the facts of the matter within these 3 months ... but rather attempts to manipulate the children against the parents, nor are the children treated in a child-friendly manner (page 2) ... The child was taken on the initiative of the youth office, motivated by prejudicial assumptions of violent acts on the part of the father ... In contrast to these accusations, the behavior of the children shows that they want nothing more than to be brought back to their parents, back into their accustomed environment. The children are crying constantly and are desperate."
Lawyer Dr. Paya then goes on to mention that, according to the legal provisions, the next closest relatives are to be consulted if the child welfare office considers the parents unfit to rear children: "The mother of the children's mother ... is a foster mother registered at the Department of Health and Family Services ... The maternal grandmother is also able to rear and care for the children, and the minor Sascha Stone is also currently in the care of the maternal grandmother ... "(page 4). Since the maternal grandfather also has the license as a foster father, the attorney applies, inter alia, "that the two minors K. [Kai] ... and A. [Anna] ... be given over, after notification of the US embassy in Vienna, to the care of the maternal grandparents.
Dr. Paya continues : "... the children are traumatized by having been taken from their parents ... and already so mentally destabilized that the minor K. [Kai] has already begun to hurt himself. ... This sudden transfer of custody has traumatized the children most severely ... In order for visitation rights to serve their proper purpose, the visitor must enjoy unrestricted contact to the child, i. e. without impairments and without the additional presence of further persons, and without being bound to certain places, such that the rightful visitor and child can plan the visits as they wish (permanently valid jurisdiction, EFSlg. 137.760 u.v.a.) The parent with whom the child does not share a common household must not be placed in the role of an occasional visitor. ... The current visitation arrangement, about which no court decision has yet been made, is contrary to hitherto existing legal principles ... The actions of the child welfare office are unlawful.
Lawyer Dr. Paya informs the US Embassy in Vienna  and writes i.a.: "Now the two minor children have been separated from their parents for almost three months and have been held by the youth center in the crisis intervention center, weeping and desperately wanting to return to their parents ... The mother managed to bring her third child, S. [Sascha] Stone ... to her own parents in the United States before the child could be taken away from her ... The parents of the children's mother ... are licensed foster parents themselves ... "
In the middle of August 2017 the Stone parents are informed that, in a further measure of force, their children have been transferred to a children's home outside of Klagenfurt .
On 18 August 2017 Dr. Farhad Paya writes further applications to the District Court of Klagenfurt : "... The main reasons for the emergency measure were the as of yet unverified claims of the class teacher, who is known for her anti-foreigner activities, because of which other students with migration backgrounds have also left the school ... The teacher 's endeavor was to remove students with a background of migration from the class, and the child welfare office has allowed itself to be instrumentalized by this teacher ... The children have not yet been questioned ... Although the children want to return to their parents and to speak to their parents, Mag. P ... [...] told the parents that the children did not want to telephone the parents. The children, however, indicated during visits that these claims of Ms. Mag. P ... are false. ... The children cried every time and wanted to return to Mama and Papa ...
The court is to be criticized for ... advocating all measures of the child welfare office, instead of making the well-being of the young children the first priority. The court is thus ... the extended arm of the youth office ... ".
On page 7 of this essay, Dr. Paya writes: With the removal of the minor A. [Anna] Stone from the family community, the child welfare office forbade her participation in ballet classes on the grounds that the child's parents would try to remove her from the custody of the child welfare office ...
Dr. Paya comments on this on 23 August 2017 : "Mag. P. thus unjustifiably presupposes an unlawful behavior on the part the child's parents, which is an indication of Mag. P's bias against the children's parents." Furthermore, Dr. Paya drew the attention of the court e. g. to the fact that the two children's planned transport to Italy is unlawful. Uncovering another of Mag. P's lies, the lawyer writes to the court: " Mag. P's bias [...] is also reflected in her statements to third parties, ... Mag. P. untruly stated that the mother had fled with the youngest child ... This assertion is also an untrue accusation. The mother did not flee with the youngest child, but left the country legally. ... (and on page 4) The children are now ill and long for their parents ... Through these hard measures on the part of the child welfare office the children are already traumatized "...
Catherine and Joe Stone are monitored by the secret service and intimidated. On two occasions, cars raced toward the Stones at a much too high speed, and the Stones could only save themselves by lightning fast reaction ...
In the dirty war against children, children themselves are also instrumentalized, mentally and emotionally abused, and stirred up against each other: Anna was instructed in foster care to speak badly about her brother. Other children were instructed to talk badly about the Stone children ...
Since the report was published in German on 6 September 2017, the family wreckers have planned to transfer Anna and Kai to a specific "SOS Kinderdorf" (children's home) which is infamous for child sexual abuse ...
Catherine and Joe Stone long so much to see their youngest child, however they must fight for their children in Austria.
* Name changed
The situation in Austria and Germany worsened tremendously since this movie has been launched:
Austrian Compliance Award 2017 vergeben