Zombie Videos - Family Violence

2024 Author: Seth Attwood | [email protected]. Last modified: 2023-12-16 15:55

Child defenders continue to nightmare parents. Cruel, merciless, but most importantly - vile. The most modern horror film is a woman who poisoned her eight-year-old son, who miraculously survived, with rat poison. Before that, three children died one after the other, of course, also poisoned by her.

This news, in this particular design, has not left the top of the news pages on the Internet for several days not so long ago.

I'm not going to say anything about the typically journalistic irresponsible stupid greyhound - to be the first to attack the victim … that is, to the topic and tear it up more colorful, so that there are pieces, blood and tears everywhere. Nor will I say that "for the sake of a catchphrase …" I will only say that my acquaintances forensic experts clutched their heads: "What are they writing ?! Everything is wrong there !!!"

Not this way. This is really not the case. Not so simply because three children died in this unfortunate woman from problems with blood clotting. And the woman did not poison her eight-year-old son with "rat poison," but treated her with a medicine, which contains the same anticoagulant as the rat poison. Agree, the difference is huge, and the perpetrators are also completely different: the attending physician and the drug manufacturers. However, the op is solely about the "mother-poisoner", and nothing more. And no less.

And in general, this is now the standard presentation of family tragedies in the media. In general, the number of such tragedies in the last year is very alarming, despite the fact that, according to the reports of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, they have not increased at all, or rather the opposite - the number of tragedies with children decreased by 17% in the first half of 2015 compared to the first half of 2014. But if you watch TV and read newspapers and magazines, you get the feeling that parents simply waged a merciless war against their children.

Here other statistics, sent to me by my friends, is very useful. On the one hand, the statistics made me very happy. So.

Recently, three years have passed since the adoption of 272-FZ (or, in common parlance, the "law of Dima Yakovlev", from which the liberal community suffered global enuresis, epilepsy and transient operhotinization). Let's see what has changed.

December 29, 2015

1. Total children in the Federal Databank: 58,907

2. Of them with the status of "for adoption": 50 304

3. Separately, children under 7 years old, with the status of "for adoption": 6 391

Corresponding figures for January 1, 2013:

1. 104 353

2. 89 266

3. 15 304

The scale of the reduction in 3 years is obvious. There are more adoptions and fewer orphans. Much. Moreover, overseas adoption fell by almost an order of magnitude. And how much there was a disgusting undercold hiss and a furious jackal barking about “ruzke can’t do anything … poor children, they will all die here … our cattle itself throws children and does not allow adoption into the Bright Paradise-West … filthy cotton wool, children are poisoned … now all our children will perish in this rashkoad …"

Break off, hissing citizens.

… However, this statistic has a troubling side. The system has fewer children eligible for adoption. And therefore, this nice bureaucratic business is under threat. Remember the formula about "commodity-money"? So, the source of the lucrative product is clearly drying up - orphanages. And therefore, in full accordance with the laws of the free market and entrepreneurship, it is necessary to expand the supply of goods by raising funds.

The closest place where you can take goods - children - is your own family. Since it is still illegal to select children “just like that”, it is necessary as soon as possible to form in the mass consciousness the image of an unfortunate “child in general” who urgently needs to be saved from moral and physical death in parental claws. And the image of “parents in general,” as an evil, terrible force, before which the unfortunate child is defenseless and which, of course, will never teach the child anything good. (And, of course, parents and children are Russians and only Russians. That not only Russians live in Russia, they remember only when they again need to accuse Russians of xenophobia, intolerance, fascism and racism … amazing, downright fabulous selectivity!)

The easiest and fastest way to influence the minds of the simplest (they, alas, make up a significant and most active percentage of the population of our country) are graphic, heart-warming stories about childhood suffering, but certainly supported by the firm belief that "there is a way out, salvation is near!" Therefore, in the past six months, in addition to the creepy stories about mothers-poisoners and fathers-pedophiles, the TV screens again poured, otherwise you will not say, a muddy stream of "social advertising" …

… In my memory, there have been three hits with anti-family commercials in the last five years. This one, the current one, is the third. Probably the most disgusting, because any more or less thinking person understands what I said above: the reasons for such "caring for children." I will not dissect videos that disfigure the appearance of parents, instilling in the child, on the one hand, a feeling of fear of them and distrust of the family, and on the other hand, the false feeling that, if something happens, he will be “helped on the side”. This is disgusting, like opening a worm. Although this is necessary for science, but in this case it is only important for you and me to see that this is a worm, a parasite of the human body.

But now I would like to clarify: on whose order these videos were made? by whose resolution are they shown on the central channels?

And most importantly: what is in the place of reason and conscience among those who are involved in their creation and demonstration?

Perhaps - they do not understand what they are doing?

With regards to the "cast" - well, it is possible that this is so. With children filmed in commercials, in general, demand … as with children. Well, adult actors … that this profession has long been occupied by degradants and completely unprincipled (and brainless) characters is known to everyone. If I were people, I would generally think: what can be taught and what good can be promoted by those whose faces (and not only them!) Do not leave the pages of scandalous magazines, who themselves grew up in an atmosphere of divorce-spree-hysterical sections and already their children does it grow in the same way? What advice do you want from them on raising a child? These are agents of degeneration, nothing light is left in them. Perhaps, however, they actually believe that the best way to grow a beautiful garden is to let it grow and blossom as and wherever it pleases. And the best way to raise a good person from a child is to "give him the right to choose and the right to vote in all matters." In this case, they are just well-meaning idiots living in a pink palace in the middle of a meadow with smiling daisies.

But the creators of the videos themselves …

… Sorry, I, unfortunately, do not believe that they are stupid. I don’t believe they really think they are “protecting children” and are fighting the notorious sickeningly deceitful invention of “domestic violence”. Although they say that all the time. Loud and constantly. They make big eyes in horror and cite false figures of “violence against children in families” collected by “foundations” and “commissions”, figures that almost immediately, moreover - officially, at briefings! - are refuted by the statistics of the Ministry of Internal Affairs - and again, they immediately bring them with incomprehensible and eerie stubbornness.

No, my dears. You tell this to someone else. Your videos are not aimed at “protecting children” (in itself a crafty combination - there is no more defenseless child than a child outside a strong family!). They are aimed at the moral corruption of children, at all-round support for their natural animal selfishness on the one hand, and at turning the family into a zone of complete discomfort, permeated with mutual fear and mistrust, on the other. And they also form a completely deceitful image of some third-party, out-of-family "services" where kind aunts will help the child solve all his problems. Parents are depicted as the root of the problems.

Not constant interethnic conflicts in schools.

Not a global distribution of drugs in the same place (and generally on the street).

Not massive smoking and drinking and energy drinks.

Not street crime.

Not kidnapping children for the purpose of ransom, murder, exploitation.

Non-aggressive advertising of junk food and propaganda of crazy materialism.

Not the absorption of the personality by the Internet.

Not the electronic dullness of an entire generation.

And parents. The last thing in the completely deranged world remained with the child strong and reliable.

On the “fight for children's rights” (more precisely, on the fight against the family), “child protection activists” are counting on “raising money”. This is the main goal of most of them. The main goal of the minority is to destroy, root out and burn out the roots of the Russian family. Turning it into a bunch of "personalities" united by a common living space, afraid and hating each other, who are constantly and vigilantly watched by the "good aunt". Which solves, according to directives and personal vision, issues in which she understands like a pig in oranges, sorry …

… Several times I have already been reproached: they say, why distort? After all, these rollers are "rollers in general", a good family will simply not accept them at their own expense, and a bad one, it is possible, will ponder … But here I have two doubts.

Firstly, I do not believe that the mandatory signs of a "good family" are the absence of corporal punishment and shouting. Well, I don’t think and I can’t take seriously those who think differently - just like I can’t take seriously those who believe that children can ONLY be raised with a belt and shouts. If the family does NOT punish children in ANY way, then I involuntarily have the feeling that parents do not care about their children, and I have never been wrong, I must say.

And secondly and most importantly. You don't need to look closely and think about it to understand that these videos are not aimed at the family at all. They are aimed specifically at children. As, incidentally, any “child protection” activity has as its goal the vivisection of the family on “children” and “adults”, some “equal subjects of relationships” and appeal specifically to children as “agents of influence” of juvenile life. Moreover, agents recruited in the dark, do not understand what they are doing.

Once I have already noted in a couple of articles that in forensic textbooks it is repeated over and over again: when working with children, specialists must take into account the peculiarities of their character. Such as: the child's high suggestibility and his inclination to fantasies up to the impossibility of distinguishing his own conjectures from the truth. And many more interesting things are said there, including about the involvement of children by outsiders in actions to the detriment of themselves using this very high suggestibility and inclination to fantasies. But the "child protection activists" either did not read these manuals, or pretend not to read them. And they also pretend that they do not understand: children, in turn, often do not realize the motives of adults' actions - and perceive it as an encroachment on personal freedom, or even violence, what is actually intended to benefit them and provide them safety.

And here such a convenient "anonymous" telephone number is at hand … there is where to say that they offend, prohibit, suppress, neglect and do not take into account … Moreover, the consequences of his denunciation, the child is able to foresee nothing more than the consequences of the courtyard lies about the fact that "soon they will buy me a scooter! ", Because Zhenya-Pashka-Leshka-Sasha already has a scooter, and you envy … But if this lie is exposed, they will simply laugh at the liar. And in this case, no one will allow him to abandon his lies, there are many precedents even in our country - when a child, separated from his parents, lied out of a trifling childish anger (but in his mind, due to the inescapable childish egocentrism of a universal injustice that has grown to the level of universal injustice!) close, begins to rush back home in horror from the "saviors", but this time no one believes his truth, because it is unprofitable for adult uncles and aunts "protecting the baby from parental aggression." This door only opens one way, that's the thing.

It is possible (judging by their manuals, it really is!) That "child protection advocates" in fact simply do not know age psychology and sincerely consider the child "a subject of family relationships" and a "full-fledged personality." But judging by their own treatment of the children who have fallen into their hands - I personally absolutely do not believe in it. Children for them are not a subject, but an object, a commodity. And parents are competitors in the possession of this value.

By the way, from the point of view of normal (traditional) upbringing, the “child-personality” warming the heart of “child-protectors” is actually just a noisy fool with unsupported huge claims, besides, who wants to keep his stupidity intact as fully and as long as possible. The streets of cities in the West are crowded with such creatures, and they amaze with their helpless egocentrism and suggestibility, surpassing the suggestibility of a laboratory guinea pig. A gratifying picture for any "democratic society".

And nevertheless, despite the horrifying picture of the activities of their brothers abroad, which led to a complete collapse of morality and society, despite the thousands of already destroyed children's lives and families in Russia itself, the "child protectors" continue to stubbornly bend their line in a typical fascist-liberal hope that nature will obey their directives. Meanwhile, nature is not going to obey, and then the latest achievements come to its aid … for example, pharmaceuticals.

When in 2002 in Holland it was forbidden to prescribe antidepressants to children "withdrawn" from families (these children very quickly became ordinary drug addicts) - the number of suicides among them jumped by 47% in a month (!). Here is the answer for you - what keeps that blissful picture of "happy childhood", which all kinds of juvenile foundations like to poke into the eyes of the Russian family. Not on the family and its bonds. Not on the selfless labor of the Dutch Makarenko (and they were never there, who does not believe - watch films like "Tsiske-Rat"!). On antidepressants. So that the child does not even think that he is living in hell.

The ban lasted, by the way, only until 2006. Then I had to again allow the children to be stuffed with drugs - so it turned out to be "safer" for them …

Already many independent observers have noticed, for example: if some kind and smiling “fund for helping children who find themselves in a difficult life situation” settled in a certain settlement, then there and then (I emphasize!) There follows a sharp surge of “conflicts in family”and“domestic violence”. Employees of such organizations are proud of the fact that they "help to make the secret clear", "they carry out a saving intervention (and they write it!) Into a closed family world that is potentially dangerous for a child." In fact, they simply and stupidly PROVE children to antisocial behavior in the family. At least that's the very advertisement that I mentioned at the beginning of the article. And then they make indicators on this …

… It seems to me that a dialogue with these creatures on the part of families is no longer possible. They tried to establish dialogue several times. But every time he came down to stories of horror stories about children hacked with an ax, who would be happy if they were taken from their parents on time. When asked why the violent psycho dad was not placed in a madhouse for treatment - away not only from children, but also from people in general! - they answer you that we have a democracy and it is impossible to restrict a person's freedom without his consent. You ask in response: that is, a child is not a person, since his freedom can be limited without his consent, but what is there - in general, despite his clearly and loudly (sometimes very loudly!) Said: “I want to stay at home!”? There is no answer to this question at all, but simply talk about how the mother threw the newborn baby into the trash and how good it would be if we had juvenile justice. You stubbornly ask: how could juvenile justice help save this child? Pursed lips, an evil look, a story about "world experience". You ask, what the hell, forgive me, with this world experience in Norway, almost 100% of children taken from their parents take drugs in the first six months after the seizure? Why aren't scandals involving the sexual exploitation of children in foster families abating in the United States? What makes English parents run abroad with their children already tens of a month?

Here they generally look at you as a cannibal and Hitler. But to answer your clearly posed questions, they still do not answer, but bend all the same line about "preventing tragedies in the family through closer control in order to identify conflicts in the early stages and provide qualified psychological assistance." That is, irresponsible (but far from safe!) Chatter is presented as “helping the family” instead of real and often the only necessary financial or material assistance.

The “guardians for child safety” have gone too far in their blind (or, on the contrary, very prudent?) “Protection of the sovereign personalities of children”, which is carried out according to the most dumb “Western” methods, or really not understanding their murderousness, or clearly fulfilling the order. All that is needed is a sweep - either a forceful one at the grassroots level (if parents want to save their children!), Or a legislative one at the state level (if the president really stands up for family and family values!).

When they say “let it be better for a hundred guilty to get away from punishment than one innocent person suffers!”, Although I do not agree with this, I still agree that “there is something to think about”. However, child protection activists use a completely different principle: "Better to let one hundred children lose their families, but we will prevent one case of violence!" And again - either they do not understand, or they “play the fool” that they don’t understand - the deprivation of the family for the child is the worst thing, no “salvation” can justify this. This method is not "one averted case of violence per hundred forgivable mistakes", it is "one saved per hundred morally destroyed."

If words do not get through, then it is necessary to bring it physically and legally. Over-legal interference in family affairs should be declared a criminal offense, however disguised it may be. And the Criminal Code is more than enough for legal interference.

And these videos, although they, in general, do not really stand out beyond the squalor and savagery of our television, to be honest - to remove it. Into the trash heap.

Oleg VERESHCHAGIN

Kirsanov, Tambov region