1. News from earlier this year, of which I can't remember whether I posted it or not. But it belongs here.
Read between the lines.
heraldsun.com.au/news/breaking-news/japan-vows-to-sign-child-abduction-treaty/story-e6frf7k6-1226557341154
Interesting what the christowest calls "child abduction". And how it always legislates in its own favour.
Note the treaty is applied even in favour of alien abductions ("foreign parents") of - in this case - Japanese children. And throughout the article above, note the stress on "(foreign) men", meaning there's the implicit acknowledgement that many of the children whom AmeriKKKa is here lobbying for are offspring of AF-WM (i.e. the IR disparity). Else why no equal mention of foreign women have the right to children of marriages with Japanese? Any mention would be largely theoretical, as the practical case is hugely owing to defunct AF-WM relationships, which is why the repeated mention of "(foreign) fathers".
Of course Hillary Clinton, like all typical christowestern women and feminists of the christowest, bats for her own ethnicity's men over the rights of Japanese women to keep their children. Note: I understand that in Japan it is traditionally the case that women are considered as having the right to take the children with them upon a split (separation/divorce). Whether you agree or not, it is curious that Clinton insists on trampling on the traditional rights of Japanese women in favour of the alien rights of alien men, who tend to by and large - which is where the stereotype comes from - be in relationships with Asian women for dubious reasons (i.e. exploitation) and whose relationships are by definition unequal.
AmeriKKKa/Hague treaties always bring their christowestern weight to bear down on other nations to legislate internationally (meaning, in othre countries) in their own interests.
2. Anyway, I might as well add a typical link to support some of what was alluded to in the following statement that terminated the previous post:
Usually - for obvious reasons - I avoid posting on child trafficking and stop at the traffick of women. The following is but the tip of the iceberg.
nzherald.co.nz/world/news/article.cfm?c_id=2&objectid=10893949
This is a much bigger problem internationally (the end-"market" is in the christowest and the islamic middle-east, by the way) than the above notes.
The question heathens and others of non-western nations should be asking themselves is: where (geography) are the children - by far most of the children - coming from?
Actually, that's not the question. It is well-known that many of them are stolen from Asian etc countries (Thailand, Philippines). No, the more interesting questions are to "investigate" how much christianism (such as via christian orphanages) are involved in the larger case of the international traffick of children (usually for the purpose of abuse). A lot of these get passed of as "legal" "adoptions" too, you know. I bet there's no Hague Treaty on that, since the people who have an interest in dismantling it are heathens and the people interested in perpetuating it are... christowestern aliens (and ME islamics) and the "native" convert sheep supplying them.
I haven't even posted the reams of disturbing materials on this topic. It is... how to say... the Stuff Of Nightmares. Especially for those who are non-western and heathen parents.
(Alien adopters are not parents, they're abductors: Alien christowestern people think they are entitled to collect kids from everywhere, and view themselves as the saviours of these kids and as the ones who truly "love" them. Since 3rd world people - especially heathens - are incapable of parenting and affection, you see. Not to the same degree as aliens are. I mean, consider how aliens are so far past "racism" that they are willing to abduct ethnic children and put them in their own toy collection cupboards, I mean their alien homes.)
Read between the lines.
heraldsun.com.au/news/breaking-news/japan-vows-to-sign-child-abduction-treaty/story-e6frf7k6-1226557341154
Quote:Japan vows to sign child abduction treaty
From: AAP ââ¬Â¢January 19, 2013 6:47PM
JAPAN'S foreign minister says his country's new government will join a treaty that allows action on child abductions, addressing one of the few rifts in relations with its main ally the United States.
Japan has not signed or ratified the 1980 Hague Convention, which requires the return of wrongfully held children to the countries where they usually live, despite a previous left-leaning government saying it planned to do so.
(Yet no mention of how "adopted" ethnic children held in countries where their ethnicity does not naturally occur and whose birth parents are not from the abductive country are "wrongfully held", hence truly abducted.)
Foreign Minister Fumio Kishida, whose conservative Liberal Democratic Party returned to power last month, said on a visit to Washington that Prime Minister Shinzo Abe's government would take the same stance.
"The government of Japan is intending to go through the necessary procedures for early conclusion of the treaty," Kishida told a news conference with US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.
Clinton said she hoped that Japan's parliament would pass legislation on the Hague treaty during its upcoming session.
Japanese foreign ministry spokesman Masaru Sato, asked about the timeframe urged by Clinton, said the government was serious about taking action.
"We will make our best efforts - all we can - so that early conclusion of the convention will be able to be achieved," Sato told reporters in Washington.
[color="#0000FF"]Japanese courts virtually never grant custody to foreign parents or to fathers, leaving few legal avenues for fathers whose former partners have fled to Japan with their children.
Hundreds of US parents have complained that they have no recourse to see their half-Japanese children. At least 120 have filed cases in Japan, usually to no avail.[/color]
[color="#0000FF"]The US Congress has repeatedly pressed Japan to address the issue, with one politician last year proposing counter-measures such as cancelling official visits or refusing export licences for products if Japan does not act.[/color]
The previous Japanese government's position had initially heartened US officials, but their hopes dimmed as Tokyo delayed action on the Hague treaty and indicated that a ratification would only apply to future cases.
Japanese critics of the Hague convention have previously argued that the country needs to protect women from potentially abusive foreign men.
Interesting what the christowest calls "child abduction". And how it always legislates in its own favour.
Note the treaty is applied even in favour of alien abductions ("foreign parents") of - in this case - Japanese children. And throughout the article above, note the stress on "(foreign) men", meaning there's the implicit acknowledgement that many of the children whom AmeriKKKa is here lobbying for are offspring of AF-WM (i.e. the IR disparity). Else why no equal mention of foreign women have the right to children of marriages with Japanese? Any mention would be largely theoretical, as the practical case is hugely owing to defunct AF-WM relationships, which is why the repeated mention of "(foreign) fathers".
Of course Hillary Clinton, like all typical christowestern women and feminists of the christowest, bats for her own ethnicity's men over the rights of Japanese women to keep their children. Note: I understand that in Japan it is traditionally the case that women are considered as having the right to take the children with them upon a split (separation/divorce). Whether you agree or not, it is curious that Clinton insists on trampling on the traditional rights of Japanese women in favour of the alien rights of alien men, who tend to by and large - which is where the stereotype comes from - be in relationships with Asian women for dubious reasons (i.e. exploitation) and whose relationships are by definition unequal.
AmeriKKKa/Hague treaties always bring their christowestern weight to bear down on other nations to legislate internationally (meaning, in othre countries) in their own interests.
2. Anyway, I might as well add a typical link to support some of what was alluded to in the following statement that terminated the previous post:
Quote:There is of course an unspeakable side to child (including infant) trafficking and which is another and most imperative reason as to why heathen parents should never lose sight of their young, and never - oh but never - let them anywhere near christoconverted cannibal sheep, alien or native missionaries/priests/nuns and the like, missionary centres like churches/christian schools or christian orphanages etc.
For all the reasons you don't - ever - want to know or think of: just don't let them out of your sight. And warn other heathens as well.
Usually - for obvious reasons - I avoid posting on child trafficking and stop at the traffick of women. The following is but the tip of the iceberg.
nzherald.co.nz/world/news/article.cfm?c_id=2&objectid=10893949
Quote:Sex abuse of babies on the rise
8:39 AM Monday Jul 1, 2013
Babies and toddlers are increasingly becoming targets for paedophiles, a child safety group has said in the wake of a horrific child abuse case.
The comments from ECPAT follows the horrific [color="#0000FF"]international paedophile[/color] case that was cracked with the help of New Zealand's Internal Affairs Department.
[color="#0000FF"]A 42-year-old Australian man has been jailed for 40 years in the United States after he bought a baby boy for US$8000 (NZ$10,321) with his partner, sexually abused the child and traded him to other paedophiles to abuse.[/color]
He and his male partner, who lived in Cairns, were tracked down by authorities after being tipped off by the censorship compliance team at Internal Affairs which investigates online child sex abuse.
The investigation began when senior Internal Affairs investigator John Peacock alerted Australian authorities after noticing something suspicious about a series of photos of a 6-year-old boy, stored on the computer of a man in a separate investigation.
ECPAT director Alan Bell told Radio New Zealand the Department of Internal Affairs was fronting the battle against child sex offenders, but it only had 13 investigators to target the increasing crime rate.
"It's something that we need to stamp out, they do need more resources. As long as it's there and it's so prevalent there's demand that more resources be put towards it.''
[color="#0000FF"]Paedophiles were offending against babies who were not able to speak out, he said.
"The acts are becoming more violent - we're talking about rape and torture. The victims are becoming younger and it's not uncommon, sadly, for toddlers, babies, infants to be violently sexually abused.''
The latest case was particularly bad because the child was bought for the purpose of being abused, Mr Bell said.[/color]
Mr Peacock told RNZ he had seen a trend of younger victims.
[color="#0000FF"]The reason behind that was that "pre-verbal children'' were not able to describe the type of abuse they were suffering, he said.
He said this latest case was rare in terms of the degree of premeditation and global organisation involved.[/color]
"I wouldn't be foolish enough to believe it was not happening elsewhere. I would certainly consider that people who are organised enough, financed enough and resourced enough would be doing these sorts of offences all around the world.''
[...]
- APNZ
This is a much bigger problem internationally (the end-"market" is in the christowest and the islamic middle-east, by the way) than the above notes.
The question heathens and others of non-western nations should be asking themselves is: where (geography) are the children - by far most of the children - coming from?
Actually, that's not the question. It is well-known that many of them are stolen from Asian etc countries (Thailand, Philippines). No, the more interesting questions are to "investigate" how much christianism (such as via christian orphanages) are involved in the larger case of the international traffick of children (usually for the purpose of abuse). A lot of these get passed of as "legal" "adoptions" too, you know. I bet there's no Hague Treaty on that, since the people who have an interest in dismantling it are heathens and the people interested in perpetuating it are... christowestern aliens (and ME islamics) and the "native" convert sheep supplying them.
I haven't even posted the reams of disturbing materials on this topic. It is... how to say... the Stuff Of Nightmares. Especially for those who are non-western and heathen parents.
(Alien adopters are not parents, they're abductors: Alien christowestern people think they are entitled to collect kids from everywhere, and view themselves as the saviours of these kids and as the ones who truly "love" them. Since 3rd world people - especially heathens - are incapable of parenting and affection, you see. Not to the same degree as aliens are. I mean, consider how aliens are so far past "racism" that they are willing to abduct ethnic children and put them in their own toy collection cupboards, I mean their alien homes.)