SOCIAL MEDIA Has Exposed the Norwegian CPS

norway_1212016_1
Delight in Truth asked Norwegian anti-CPS activist Marianne Skanland how the mainstream Norwegian media will cover the international outrage against Barnevernet. So far there have been a few TV reports and news articles documenting the protests, but some of these reports have been spun to give the consumer the idea that Barnevernet is not understood internationally… that these protesters have no idea how the system works.

Marianne, who was an expert witness in CPS cases and understands the system as well as anyone, responded by appealing to the New Year’s mass sexual attacks in Cologne, Germany by Muslim foreigners. This event was largely suppressed in the mainstream media, but the world somehow found out about it.

Why? Because of small news outlets, blogs and the average common sense human beings who shared the news in SOCIAL MEDIA.

SOCIAL MEDIA is the reason the Romanian media picked up the Bodnariu case and now almost every person in Romania knows about it. SOCIAL MEDIA is the reason the Romanian Evangelical Church (and recently the Orthodox) is mobilizing their members to take to the streets and protest the kidnapping of children in Norway.

The bottom line is this: for now we must rely on Social Media.

We hope the mainstream media will expose the evil of Barnevernet. But we cannot count on it. The Norwegian media is not conditioned to think independently because they are subservient to a centralized system that frowns upon dissent. Hence, the eerie parallels to totalitarian systems like communism, fascism, etc.

This serves notice to the traditional media: you can no longer monopolize the news. Your filters can no longer apply as they did until recently.

We now rely on vast socialization networks to get the message out. We rely on the people of Norway to share articles that expose Barnevernet. Delight in Truth had about 5,000 visitors from Norway recently because of Facebook. SOCIAL MEDIA buzz is energizing the base and creating new support in Norway.

The message exposing Barnevernet’s disproportionate measures must penetrate inside Norway.

And we rely on SOCIAL MEDIA to do it.

Until the mainstream media fully wakes up to the horror of Barnevernet.

18 comments on “SOCIAL MEDIA Has Exposed the Norwegian CPS

  1. …. And because of social media and blogs like yours, Norwegians may be learning for the first time evrr of the many problems plaguing their Child Protective Services and their inhumane practices, esp. the way they snatch children. Keep up the good work!

  2. Pingback: SOCIAL MEDIA Has Exposed the Norwegian CPS | ARMONIA MAGAZINE - USA

  3. THE INFLICTION OF INTENTIONAL EMOTIONAL DISTRESS AND IRREPARABLE HARM [EMOTIONAL TRAUMA] ON PARENTS OF CHILDREN CONFISCATED BY NORWAY STATE’S BARNEVERNET FROM THE FAMILIES SANCTUARIES…

    The Norway’s totalitarian Rules and Regulations surrounding State-sponsored confiscation of Bodnarius’ family members (children) from their family sanctuary, purport to sanction the use of religious-driven phrases and ideologies, by parents, as “abuse of children”. And on this charge alone, the Barnevernet may confiscate the children from that family–as in the case of the Bodnarius. Expressing religiously-nuanced phrases and any such sentences orally to children, in Norway, it surely attracts the wrath of the State-sponsored confiscation of children from affected families by the totalitarian Barnevernet. Even trivial “manifestations” [singing a little religious song] by parents or children are perceived as “abuse”, and on those charges alone, the reprehensible and odious Barnevernet may confiscate the children from that family–as in the case of the Bodnarius family. Other trivial “manifestations” can be gleaned from the videos on youtube or complaints written on Internet by the emotionally traumatized parents.

    Norway State-sponsored invasion of parental sanctuary and infringing on God-ordained authority conferred upon parents is only one drastic part of the manifest violation of international human rights. Every Constitution of our modern democracies declare parental authority and family sanctuary as an inviolable principle of jurisprudence upon which society depends. In United States of America, under the Fourth Amendment’s Bill of Rights, even an “expectation of privacy” deserves protection by the federal Courts, in addition to the “right to be secure in the houses, papers and effects”– the society’s family’s sanctuary, and keystone of the governmental structure which was contemplated by the Constitution and Common Law.

    Norway State-sponsored intentional infliction of emotional distress is the other drastic aspect of violation of the international human rights. The invasion of family sanctuary and confiscation of its minor members (children) by the State-sponsored child services agency is cognizant in all democracies as a “severe emotional distress”–that is extreme and outrageous conduct that causes suffering such that no reasonable person should have to endure it. A mother (or father, or both) who experiences and witnesses the forceful separation from her children by State-sponsored actors, which by their abusive and negligent conduct, inflict severe emotional distress is legally entitled to recover (compensated) for her “emotional trauma” and any bodily accompanying injury!

    Finally, there are 13 important human rights which Norway has violated–and must compensate Bodnariu family, and many other victims, for the harm inflicted on them. Following are these human rights violated by Norway:

    (1) European Convention on Human Rights, released on 04/11/1950, Art. 6 (para. 2), Art. 8, Art.9, Art.13 &14.
    (2) International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights Art. 18, 23 and 24.
    (3) UN Convention on the Rights of the Child Art.8 para. 1 and 2, and Art.14(4)
    (4) The Universal Declaration of Human Rights Art.18.
    (5) International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination Art. 5, Para. 7.

    These 13 violations are enough to indict and convict Norway in any federal or International Court of Law.

    In light of the foregoing, even if the State returns the minor members (children) to their original family sanctuary, the parents of these minor persons (children) are left with serious scars and wounds for the rest of their lives! Who is going to compensate these thousands of victims, such as the Bodnarius, if the international community continues to turn a blind eye to the aforementioned outrageous conduct of Norway State and its odious actors?

  4. ATTENTION: In recent past, both Romania and Norway have signed and pledged to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) that they will recognize its jurisdiction as “compulsory”. Given this development, it is possible that Romanian government may open special proceedings against Norway, with respect to Bodnariu children and their parents, and Norway may have to bite the bullet if ICJ gives a winning ticket to the Romanian government pleading for “repatriation” of Romanian citizen in Norway who were harmed by the Barnevernet’s actions with tacit acquiescence of the government.

    Click on link below to view countries signatory to the ICJ “compulsory jurisdiction”:

    http://www.icj-cij.org/jurisdiction/?p1=5&p2=1&p3=3

    Please Notice that Norway is a signatory country to ICJ “compulsory jurisdiction” since 1996.

  5. Barnevernet – Children kidnapping in Norway:

    It’s obvious that Barnevernet does not use “kidnapping” as a last resort and there is a great amount of abuse by this odious agency sponsored and controled by the state.

  6. Pingback: Sosiale medier har avslørt det norske barnevernet - Barnevern.org

  7. NORWAY’S BARNEVERNET STARTED THE BALL ROLLING, provoking Bodnarius’ older children to a religious conversation because they sang a religious nuanced song on their school grounds where only Lutheran religion is permitted as a matter of official policy!

    After this event, the school director got bent out of shape and summoned local Barnevernet agents, and these odious beings started the ball rolling, thus ambushing the children and building a VENGEFUL process of children confiscation. This initial ambush of children was carefully orchestrated (and “doctored”) latter on in order to steer clear of the Article 2 of the Norway Constitution. Here’s the text of Norway Constitution, Article 2, following:

    “All inhabitants of the Realm shall have the right to free exercise of their religion. The Evangelical-Lutheran religion shall remain the official religion of the State. The inhabitants professing it are bound to bring up their children in the same.”

    Let’s do a little “acrobatic” exercise with the “order” sequence of the text, and discover the contradictions:

    (1) Notice, that “Lutheran” religion shall remain the “official religion of the State.”
    (2) Notice, that “all inhabitants…shall have the right to free exercise of their religion.”
    (3) Notice, that Lutherans ARE BOUND to bring up their children in the Lutheran religion.

    Here it is: the Lutherans ARE BOUND to bring up their children in their own religion because it is “the OFFICIAL RELIGION OF THE STATE”. This officially-sponsored INDOCTRINATION AND RADICALIZATION BY CONSTITUTIONAL MANDATE is permitted as a matter of State policy–which CONTROLS–but the Bodnarius’ are DENIED “to bring up their children” in their own religion by Norway state through its instrumentality which “invents” and “doctors” their deplorable allegations against the Bodnarius by ambushing their little children into a sever interrogation “under duress”–remember these words “under duress”! These demoniac-inspired practices are aimed at the parents, too! To be sure, all of the damning papers that Bodnarius signed for the odious Barnevernet–and to the Bodnarius’ family’s detriment–are “under duress”. Don’t let this escape from view! That’s how stealthy and vague is Norway Constitution when discussing religion!

    And the criminal “official oppression” visited upon the Bodnarius is not curbed by the highest levers of official power of the State which presumably safeguards “all inhabitants”–except the two innocent parents of the 5 ambushed children whose traumatizing grief and pain continues! Shame, Shame, Shame on you Norway!
    Your despicable actions against Bodnarius family condemn you! You are writing your own sentence before the whole world! Shame on you! Your image is soiled before the civilized and reasonable people of the world!

    • That is a misunderstanding, Anthony, of the provision of the constitution. Back in the 1800s, when our constitution was established (in 1814), there was a paragraph forbidding entry into Norway of “Jews and Jesuits”. By “Jews” was meant people practicing Judaism, there was no bar to people of Jewish race. But it was certainly discrimination, and was argued strongly against e.g. by famous authors. The prohibition was finally taken away.

      The Catholic church was allowed in Norway in 1843. The prohibition against Jesuits was not taken away until 1956, upon our entry into the Council of Europe. There have been actions against charismatic and lay Protestant denominations, but it is more than a hundred years ago now and is not at all relevant to the Bodnariu case.

      Recently, the constitution’s prescription about the “religion of the state” has been altered. It has, however, not been of any consequence, it only meant that the head of state (the king), the government minister having charge of the department handling religious affairs, the prime minister, and a majority of government ministers had to formally belong to the Lutheran church. Our present king actually asked them to keep the requirement that the king himself (or queen, if/when we have a reigning queen) should belong to the Norwegian Church (the official name for the Lutheran Church, which was previously known as the State Church). It is a long long time since Norway had “prescriptive religion” – something like the early settlers in the New England states had in their society. (I have actually read Hawthorne’s The Scarlet Letter and also some documentary historical literature, although I don’t know all that much about American history!)

      I have found that especially Americans (!) often have a difficulty understanding the role of tradition in formal law in Europe. England has no constitution at all. We have, as I said, from 1814, and one of the paragraphs says that “the king elects his council”, viz the government, meaning that the kind actually decides politics. At the time, a king was a real ruling sovereign. But of course he/she no longer can exercise that kind of power. In Norway, he has not been able to since 1884, when there was a battle between parliament and the king, ending in “parliamentarism” breaking through: the government is responsible to parliament and cannot function against whatever parliament decides, and the king cannot decide who the cabinet ministers are going to be or their politics. So we do not have, as in the USA, a balance of power. The king has no political role whatever, and the government has to answer to (the majority in) the elected parliament. The letter of the law on that point has not been changed, but it cannot be “activated”.

      All in all, in the Bodnariu case as in other CPS cases, a lot or arguments are used by the CPS, especially initially in a case. Then they settle, through the advice of municipality lawyers etc, on those arguments they think will win through. The all-powerful argument in the Bodnariu case is sure to be the use of corporal punishment. Even light slaps of children are expressly forbidden by law (there has been a “clarification” saying exactly that). So this is a CRIMINAL offense, regardless of any parent’s reason for his/her way of raising his/her children. A court case about the criminal matter of physical punishment will not deal with the removal of the children at all. Whether the law against physical punishment should be like that or not can be debated but will hardly matter for the outcome of concrete cases now.

      The way religions is brought into the case is more relevant in the CIVIL case of whether the CPS should keep the children. Religious upbringing is relevant there because the CPS and the courts have the power to assess whether it is harmful or likely to harm the children’s development.

      The criticism of the CPS should concentrate on the disproportionate nature of removing the children, EVEN if the parents are found guilty of a criminal offense; a general debate on religion will lead nowhere in the case and is not likely to lead anywhere in a general debate either.

      IF the Romanian or other supporters of the Bodnariu family go on thinking that the case is only or primarily a case of religious persecution, they will lose. Norwegian authorities know that it is not and can easily refute it – if they bother about it at all. It is a general question of how the CPS consider children, children’s best interest, and how they act against children and their families, which is the central issue, in the Bodnariu case as in other CPS cases.

  8. A RELIGIOUS STEALTH IN THE NORWAY CONSTITUTION, ARTICLE 2:

    “All inhabitants of the Realm shall have the right to free exercise of their religion. The Evangelical-Lutheran religion shall remain the official religion of the State. The inhabitants professing it are bound to bring up their children in the same.”
    Let’s do a little “acrobatic” exercise with the “order” sequence of the text, and discover the contradictions:
    (1) Notice, that “Lutheran” religion shall remain the “official religion of the State.”
    (2) Notice, that “all inhabitants…shall have the right to free exercise of their religion.”
    (3) Notice, that Lutherans ARE BOUND to bring up their children in the Lutheran religion.
    The Contradiction and Discrimination Under Pretenses:
    The Lutherans ARE BOUND to bring up their children in their own religion because it is “the OFFICIAL RELIGION OF THE STATE”. This officially-sponsored INDOCTRINATION AND RADICALIZATION BY CONSTITUTIONAL MANDATE is permitted as a matter of State policy–which CONTROLS–but the Bodnarius’ are DENIED “to bring up their children” in their own religion by Norway state through its instrumentality which “invents” and “doctors” their deplorable allegations against the Bodnarius by ambushing their little children into a sever interrogation “under duress”. Remember these two little legal words “under duress”.
    No doubt, these demoniac-inspired practices of Barnevernet are aimed at the parents, as well! To be sure, all of the damning papers that Bodnarius signed for the odious Barnevernet–and to the Bodnarius’ family’s detriment–are “under duress”. Don’t let this fact escape from view! That’s how stealthy and vague is the Norway Constitution…when discussing religion!
    And the criminal “official oppression” visited upon the Bodnarius is not curbed by the highest levers of official power of the State which presumably safeguards “all inhabitants”–except the two innocent parents of the 5 ambushed children whose traumatizing grief and pain continues!
    Shame, Shame, Shame on you Norway! Your despicable actions against Bodnarius family condemn you! You are writing your own sentence before the whole world!
    Shame on you! Your image is soiled before the civilized and reasonable people of the world!

  9. I don’t know quite under which recent article to put this comment, but I think perhaps here, about the way social media can help spread information as nothing else can.

    This is a new case: A 13 year old girl has died in a foster home on 4 February, because the CPS and the foster parents did not bother about medical assistance, and the CPS just waved the real parents’ concerns away.

    She died in a foster home in Sunnfjord, not far away from Naustdal, to be sure. I am certain all the authorities in the county and in Naustdal municipality will say, if they notice it at all, that it is so tragic that such a young girl dies, and they feel dreadfully sorry.

    Actually, there are a couple of newspaper articles about it, but of course it ought to have been national top news. The case is reported to the police with a preliminary charge, so no doubt now there will be pressure to keep very quiet. It is, after all, “an individual case”, and you know how Norwegian authorities shy away from all responsibility for “individual cases”. This cowerdice is neatly “explained” as an obligation to silence.

    Please read here:

    “Thirteen-year-old girl dead in foster home in Sunnfjord, the county of Sogn og Fjordane”
    http://forum.r-b-v.net/viewtopic.php?f=56&t=8172

  10. Thank you for making this page which I discovered this very night. I have slightly seen some comments before, but did not find the blog at the Bodnariu support groups homepage and went back to my life and work at facebook, communicating with the parents first of all, together with the “normal people” that i want to wake up, and Steven Bennet 🙂 I want to read all what is written here and make comments for sure. For now I just want to say what has been on my mind for a coupple of months: I am so happy that professor Marianne Haslev Skånland has been discovered by you, our foreign angels, so quickly. As far as I know she has been the very best CPS critic in Norway during the last… I dont know how many years, 20 I guess. As far as I can consider she has the very best mind, pen, psychological insight and experience, together with language knowledge, to advice and inform in the work for children and parents harassed by the CPS.

Share your thoughts...

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s