The children’s Charity Barnardos is currently running a funding campaign to fill its coffers. The charity made good use of the Christmas TV audience as a good time for happy cash donations while offering up another script to reprogram the populations to further accept the trafficking of children by the corporate networks hidden behind the humanitarian title of Charitable Trust.
They are creating an industry based entirely on the removal of your children while focusing the mainstream to Eastern European networks that fill the Bitcoin funded dark web.
Barnardo’s is a British charity founded by Thomas John Barnardo in 1866, to care for vulnerable children and young people. As of 2013, it raised and spent around £200 million each year running around 900 local services, aimed at helping these same groups. It is the UK’s largest children’s charity, in terms of charitable expenditure.
Anything that moves to control children from the corporate arena, has to be fully vetted and the findings made public, especially when they parade as a charity as did the Jimmy Savile cult, a charity cult protected by the Newsnight team which means the BBC. This happened because there was no vetting and no reporting of the facts.
Something is going on when it comes to the movement of children, a network is being formed that is tied to the family court, to the now corporate social services and all the care homes and affiliated corporate organisations that are charging the taxpayer a fortune to special needs care for your children.
I believe in Barnardos and other such pseudo-charitable trusts we glimpse the global network for the trafficking of children right before our eyes, protected in the gloss of feigning the social state. We need only go back to 2009 when Barnardos was run by Martin Narey, who said that social workers should remove more, not fewer, children from their natural parents.
He admitted many professionals would regard his views as “heresy”, and criticised the prevailing philosophy of social services departments which, he claimed, sought to keep families together wherever possible. Source
Martin Narey, who formerly worked as director general of the Prison Service.
They would again push for the expansion of child removal in 2010 when Narey said :
One in three children who should be taken into care are being left with neglectful parents – only for the state to intervene at a later date, the head of Barnardo’s said.
Martin Narey said the drive to keep children with their families was ‘destabilising’ and cost social services up to an extra £33,000 per child each year. Now its all about the money. Source
With all this legal power grabbing going on in the background to our society it is imperative that we stop and look hard at the organisations claiming any kind of authority, we need to understand what they are by raising the right questions; who do they serve, what are their real aims, what does the past tell us about the actions of the organisation. I can find no better example of a story to help you become aware of how the children’s charitable trusts cover a darker agenda, then the story of the approved school for girls called Duncroft, from which the last outing of all things paedophilia and Savile did rise
From an article for the Institute of Race Relations (IRR) published March 17, 2011, by Frances Webber, we gain insight to the hidden game of the children’s charity Barnardos as they moved into the sinister arena of the detention of children, this comes after a decision to work with the UK Border Agency (UKBA), announced on 9 March 2011.
Barnardos said that it had agreed with UKBA to provide staff at the proposed new immigration holding centre for up to nine families at Pease Pottage, Crawley Forest.
Much concern was had by campaigners when it was seen that deception was the order of the day as UKBA and its consultants putt forward the planning application which described the centre as ‘pre-departure accommodation’, which allowed the dropping of the word ‘detention’.
A clear case of sanitising the reality of the charities involvement in the detention of children.
Both hit back via UKBA’s website, which claimed :
“Families ‘will have free movement around the site, security will be low-key, and the site will not have an institutional feel.”
NoBorders‘ held an investigation and proved conclusively that the centre, would be a detention centre — complete with 2.5-metre perimeter fences, locked areas, internal fences dividing the site into accessible and inaccessible areas, a ‘buffer zone’ inside the perimeter fence, and powers to use force and ‘control and restraint’ techniques on both adults and children. The plans even suggest capacity to segregate difficult families for ‘special attention’ in two special units. All areas will be supervised at all times and ‘routine observation of all parts of the grounds will be undertaken’ (although the application does not refer to CCTV, it is likely that this is what it means). The fact that children, and families, may be allowed to leave the centre on supervised shopping or cinema trips, subject to individual risk assessments, does not mask but in fact highlights the institutional nature of the place.
Crawley Borough Council planning committee recommended that the plans be approved, and accepted UKBA’s argument that the accommodation is not in fact a detention centre or short-term holding centre
Thus placing this type of building as not recognised in any planning category.
The author moved to present data which shows clearly, Barnardos is collaborating in the endorsement of child detention. Full Story
In the 1950′s and 60′s children from Barnardos were shipped without their parents permission to Australia and Canada. Often the parents were told the children were dead and the children were told their parents were dead!
Here is the link for info and a book by Margaret Humphreys *empty cradles*
Case studies : Barnardo’s UK children’s centres
Blood Money for Barnardos
Barnardos please stop child detention
No Borders demonstration : Thursday 24 March 2011
Medical Justice report : State Sponsored Cruelty : Children in immigration detention
Read an IRR News story : ‘Detention by another name’
Read an IRR News story : ‘No Borders oppose new deportation centre’