Time to Stop Destroying Families Part 2

Things have to change if the lives of the lost are to have any hope of getting through life without the baggage of harm they have suffered through no fault of their own.

By James Williams and Michael Ramey

Potential Game Changer

The Family First Protection Act is potentially a game changer. Considering how many young people end up in prison, as addicts (drug, alcohol, gambling, sexual perversions), prostitutes and homeless, the ‘snatch and place’ policies have had a long and unimpressive history of destroying lives from the get-go. Things have to change if the lives of the lost are to have any hope of getting through life without the baggage of harm they have suffered through no fault of their own.

This Act now creates a pressure to find solutions that will seek to keep families together.

I have checked with the UK Government on whether they intend to follow America’s lead, but am waiting a response from them. I would like to be optimistic, but usually when contacting administrations there is a good deal of flannel and little substance. I anticipate a ‘glossy picture response’ which bears little resemblance to reality. Let’s face it, if children in care in a particular local authority are not doing so well, then there is political fallout if it comes to light.

Ofsted  = Office for Standards in Education, Children’s Services and Skills.

In the UK, we have Ofsted as the agency to oversee the welfare of children and they are necessary to ensure certain standards are met, but they tend to only judge by the policies of the paradigm in place rather than the principles of preserving family unity.

Ofsted’s declared statement: “Ofsted is the Office for Standards in Education, Children’s Services and Skills. We inspect services providing education and skills for learners of all ages. We also inspect and regulate services that care for children and young people.”

First Hand Report from Michael Ramey

At the US National Conference on Child Abuse Michael Ramey attended all three keynotes and more than a dozen break-out sessions and was amazed by the refreshing and encouraging tone of the entire event. This is his account:

“I attended one session led by alumni of the foster care system. That is, adults who were once in foster care have come together to make their collective voice heard. Perhaps not surprisingly, this group strongly favors family preservation over the current foster care model.

“I attended another session by a “birth parents” group. Their organization is made up of parents who have had their children removed (and only in some instances returned), and serves other parents now going through the same nightmare. They work to make the voice of parents heard—and it sounds remarkably like the voice of the foster child alumni.

“I heard from legal organizations who work to provide quality legal representation for parents in the family courts, regardless of the family’s income level. And guess what they believed: families should be protected and preserved, not separated.

“Everywhere I turned, I heard people who agree with us on the nature and importance of family. Was this really a government-run conference on child welfare practices?

“One of my favorite speakers is an Arkansas family court judge. She oversees child removals. But more often than not, she instead seeks ways to keep families together. Those who believe all family court judges are evil need to meet this woman; she will change their mind.

Like so many at the conference, she promotes services rather than separation. She looks for ways to keep children safe in their families, not safe from their families.

“She understands that separating families causes trauma in 100% of cases. The only time that’s called for is if the child is in imminent danger of harm—if the threat of trauma in the home is greater than the trauma guaranteed to come from separating that family.

Did I mention how refreshing it was to hear that?”

Moving Beyond the Foster Care Model

“One of the keynote speakers, Amelia Franck-Meyer of Alia, called out the entire foster family model of child welfare. She pointed out that the only way to make a child feel safe is to make their family safe. Children—especially small children—know they will be fine as long as mama is fine.

“Now, I know all foster homes are not evil, any more than all judges are evil. In fact, most foster homes involve loving families opening their hearts for children. It’s not the foster family’s fault if many of those children should still be home with their parents. Regardless of who caused the child’s need, these families graciously open their door.

“Still, the system that unnecessarily puts so many children “in care” needs to be changed.

When crises arise, Franck-Meyer declared, healing for children doesn’t come from putting them with “better people, or richer people, or whiter people. Healing comes from their people.”

“By the end of the week I was exchanging business cards freely, gathering potential new contacts who believe, as we do, that families should be preserved. For us, that starts with protecting the rights of parents to direct the upbringing and education of their child. Others may take a different starting point, but their conclusions are the same.

“Children are best served by protecting their right to be with the parents who love them.”

Michael Ramey

Executive Director

Parental Rights Foundation

Fallout from Failure

I see the homeless sitting in shop doorways. I know that many of them do have accommodation to go to, but I also understand that many cannot cope with life even with the material support that is provided for them.

It is not just a matter of providing shelter and food. Many or most of the homeless have significant psychological problems that are rooted in their past. The same goes for those in prison. Each person has psychological complications that cannot be solved by just giving them a cup of soup or a flat.

They are the casualties of family breakdowns and fatherless families that became family breakups.

The damage is not just with them though. There are those who suicide or self harm such as loving fathers excluded from a meaningful role in their children’s lives. The legacy of broken family syndrome is one that is endemic and generational. There are those who suffered as victims of criminal acts by past damaged individuals. There is also the economic costs to society – prisons, police, courts, hospitals, physical harm, property damage, loss of earnings.

It is an ugly carbuncle that never seems to heal.

Final Word

As I close this article, I am still waiting for a response from the British Government. For me, I find my efforts hampered by my own sense of being overwhelmed by numbers. Often, I will feel paralysed by the depth and volume of neglect and depravity that many thousands of children are forced to endure everyday through no fault of their own.

James A Williams

CEO of Chimes Media

This may sound like an appeal, but I operate with only what pitiful resources I have to hand. If anyone can help in any way then I could bring more stories of the forgotten and hidden to the internet or even save just one or two from the tyranny of the life they have.

Chimes Media is viewer funded.

If you would be kind enough to help out please subscribe and donate here:


Click subscribe and if you can spare some money it would be much appreciated.

Time to Stop Destroying Families Part 1

Advocates for parents and children’s welfare have long criticized the over zealousness with which children are ‘snatched from loving families only to be thrust into the care of strangers or left to rot in care homes as unwanted castaways.

By James Williams and Michael Ramey

Sentence of the Innocent

In 2018, more than 400,000 children entered foster care in America. That is over 1000 per day on average.

LA = Local Authority IFA = Independent Fostering Agencies.

By comparison, in the UK, as at 31 March 2018, just over 53,000 children and young people were placed with foster carers. This was an increase of around 1,000 compared with the previous year.  Even though these numbers make up a very small percentage of all children both in the US and Britain, they are still truly shocking numbers and you have to ask why families are failing on such scale?

Advocates for parents and children’s welfare have long criticized the over zealousness with which children are ‘snatched from loving families only to be thrust into the care of strangers or left to rot in care homes as unwanted castaways. It is nearly always not the children’s fault for their predicament. In too many cases, they find themselves eventually thrown into the outside world to fend for themselves with little or no ground base of a family home to fall back on should they falter.

Encounters with Young Men and False Advocacy Groups

I have encountered these young people, often by chance, over a period of many years. One such young man living in London contacted me when I was producing Men’s Matters radio programs on Express FM in Portsmouth. We agreed to meet in Hyde Park, just as billionaire Bill Gates was delivering a speech on a stage a few feet away from where we sat.

It was quite a contrast. This young man had come from a single mother home and had had a very troubled early life with no father present and living with a mother who was all ready to call the cops on him for just about anything. It culminated with him being involved in petty crimes and doing prison time.

“Just want someone to listen to me.”

Ironically, I presented his case to a prominent male advocacy group since he was a useful example of how young men have and are being failed by feminized social and education systems. They fail to address young male problems since they are convinced that men are privileged by patriarchy and male bad behaviour is due to learned toxic masculinity.

To my disgust, the advocacy group were not interested due to his criminal background. I tried them again with a different ‘damaged’ man who suffered Aspergers Syndrome, but again they shunned and excluded him. They seemed more concerned with their own image than embracing and helping to elevate men who wanted to restart their lives on their own terms.

It was not long after that, that the advocacy group severed ties with me, but not before hurling some very aggressive rhetoric in my direction which included wishing I would die. It left me cautious towards getting too close with those that claim righteousness, but are anything but.

My more successful support encounters revolved about being prepared to list to young men’s pain. Some find it very difficult to open up unless they feel they can trust you and everything they say has to be done as strictly confidential unless they want something revealed.

Care and Fostering Placements

The reasons for why children in the US and UK are placed in these potentially life-damaging situations are similar. However, considering the sheer numbers it would not help to cherry-pick a handful of cases that would potentially fire up the emotions without tackling the need for policies that support struggling families rather than routinely break them up. 

The Case for Families

Michael Ramey, Executive Director of the Parental Rights Foundation in the USA says:

“In too many instances, those children were taken from loving, innocent homes. But even among those who suffered maltreatment, recent studies have shown that the majority would still be better left at home.”

Michael Ramey attended a three-day conference that was put on by the Children’s Bureau of the Administration for Children and Families (part of the federal Department of Health and Human Services in the US) and this is some of his report.

The Family First Protection Act

“A lot of the sessions addressed the new Family First Protection Act passed into law in 2018,” he explained. “The new law, which affects federal funding of state child welfare programs, allows more funds to go to preventive measures, including quality legal representation for parents.

“The former rule was that the federal monies only pay for services that remove children from families, has been changed. But this is such a radical new concept that a section of nearly every workshop I attended focused on how preventive services can qualify for this new approach.”

Pro- Family President

Now this is something that should be credited to the Trump Administration. I believe that President Donald Trump is perhaps one of the most proactive and sincerely family friendly presidents in US history. He seems to understand the importance of families and the difference they make on the behaviour and outcomes of individuals.

Prejudice against Dads

It is perhaps a fact-of-life that where money is to be paid for a particular service, then the tendency will be for demand to grow to absorb the funds available and turn the associated need into a self-fulfilling situation but, we are not talking about producing widgets, we are talking about lives and, more importantly, children’s lives.

Clearly, there are situations where children are abused and/ or at serious risk of abuse. Removing them from imminent and ongoing danger is sadly always going to be the only viable option. How the children are protected and cared for after removal is another question.

I am not satisfied that, where it is deemed necessary to remove a child from their home, that consideration for using extended family members’ accommodation is given as a serious option. A lot more should be done in this area and there is a strong suggestion that ant-male bias rears its ugly head here as the father’s side of the family are all-too-often treated as automatically non-viable.

Indeed, I have also come across cases where the father’s side of the family were hardly given a passing thought for this role. It means that the father’s parents and other relatives will lose all contact with a child which can mean cutting off a huge chunk of family support that can help children survive some a difficult period in their lives. I am no fan of feminism, but it is in this area that I have come to detest them most since their divisive ideology gets to hurt children, often permanently. 

Aside from any prejudices by decision makers over the disposal of children, it cannot be ignored that enormous sums of money (tax-payers money) has gone into fostering and care home provision. There is thus a lucrative financial incentive for avoiding keeping children in their family home or at least placing them in the care of extended family members.

Love and tears

To Follow:

Time to Stop Destroying Families – Part 2


CHIMES MEDIA SUBMITS LETTER OF PROTEST Chimes Media Editor, James Williams, submitted a letter of complaint about the psychological torture of Tommy Robinson whilst being supposedly under the care of Her Majesty’s prison service. Tommy looked like someone who had been intercepted while being transported to Stalin’s Gulag. This is a shameful disgrace and not a proud day for Britain. That being said, but the howling toadies of the ‘Humanitarian’ Left and Media, eager to smear him as much as possible while showing no interest in his obviously gaunt physical state speaks volumes.

This is a copy of the letter sent to Right Honourable Penny Mordaunt MP for Portsmouth North:

Dear Penny, VIOLATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS – Tommy Robinson Having seen film of political prisoner Tommy Robinson following his release from prison, my first impression of him was how thin he looked. Apparently, he lost 40lbs in weight during his illegal incarceration and torture. I am genuinely shocked and outraged with the manner of his treatment. He looked like a POW from Vietnam. The concerns listed here are not exhaustive and I appreciate it will take some time to answer as it is not you who is personally responsible. • The British establishment are supposed to have a duty of care, so why was this not provided for Tommy Robinson? • Did any doctor examine him during his imprisonment? If they did they should be fired for gross negligence. Prisoners held in solitary are supposed to be reviewed by the Governor and Health care specialists and an independent monitor. Did this happen at all? • Did a Governor visit Tommy on a daily basis? • It is known that men held in solitary confinement for more than a week suffer mental deterioration. Why was nothing done to alter this state such as moving Tommy to a safer prison? • After 42 days in solitary the case is supposed to be reviewed by a regional director. Did that happen? • Tommy was improperly arrested, convicted, tried, sentenced and tortured in prison. Every step of the way he was improperly treated. Why was this allowed to happen and why did nobody intervene? Where were the checks and balances? • Did Leeds (judge, police, anyone) consult with London over Tommy Robinson’s presence outside the court? It took 1.5 hours before he was arrested. This is sufficient time for someone in Whitehall or wherever to arrive in their office, process the information and give instructions on what to do. I and, I suspect, many thousands of people across the world have copies of the Appeal Court’s ruling. It is a revelation of appalling failures, outright dereliction of duties, law and human rights abuse. There should be an independent public enquiry into the way Tommy was treated. • It is global public knowledge that the US Ambassador spoke with the UK Ambassador about Tommy Robinson’s predicament with the threat that if the UK Government did not take action then the US would denounce the May Government. Can you confirm this is the case? • The 13 month sentence was shocking. There has never been a journalist thrown in prison since the 1940s. A sense of proportion should have been retained. It should not have been given in such a short time to allow the court to reflect soberly. Is Judge Jeffrey Marsden acted negligently in his duties? Was personal prejudice a factor? • In the private sector, there would be a consideration of criminal negligence as the sentence and subsequent treatment put a man’s life and health at considerable risk. The impression that decisions over his life came from a senior authority. Were national security elements involved? Whose decision was it to move Tommy from a relatively safe prison (Hull) to one where he was under daily threats and held in conditions that even prisoners at Guantanamo Bay are not subjected to? • Was the transfer an excuse to place him in solitary confinement for over 23 hours per day so that he could be tortured? • On Tommy’s medical record, it was recorded that after his previous incarceration he had suffered Post Traumatic Stress. Why was this not taken into consideration when he was being locked up or, was it because of this he was moved to Onley? • Shortly after his arrest for alleged breach of the peace (even though there was nobody else around to offend), Tommy’s lawyer was advised that he was due to be released. Subsequent to that advice, Tommy was spirited out the back door and charged for a different offence i.e. contempt of court. Was this a deliberate deception to deny him proper legal counsel? • Tommy’s cell door was left unlocked by his jailers “accidentally” on three occasions, putting him at a real risk of violence. Why did this happen? Has the prison governor explained why his staff did this? • Other prisoners regularly went to Tommy’s ground floor cell, and shouted at him through the flap of his door. This was permitted by the prison authorities. This is psychological torture. Why did the prison authorities allow this? • The window in Tommy’s cell opened opposite the prison mosque, so other prisoners would file passed it. He was unable to leave this open during the stifling heat of a hot summer because other prisoners would throw faeces and spit through it. This is psychological torture. Why was this permitted by the prison authorities? • His meals were apparently prepared by other prisoners. He could not see if anything had been put in them. Another prisoner would present him with a plate of ‘food’ at his door and say “Hope you enjoy your meal, Tommy.” Consequently, he could not eat it. Why were meals being prepared for an at-risk prisoner by the very people who wanted to kill him? • Why was Tommy denied more than £12 allowance per week which he had to spend on food? • Tommy was living out of tins of tuna (1 per day). That is why he lost so much weight. If he had not been release when he had, he would have suffered severe physical problems from malnutrion. Why did nobody in the prison report this as a matter of concern? Where was the medical care? • His ‘exercise time’ consisted of walking around a wire cage alone and with no one to talk to. Being in solitary confinement for extended periods is completely inhuman and against basic human rights especially for prisoners who have not caused any disturbance. Was this due to a deliberate program of psychological torture being actioned? • Tommy was only allowed to phone home during the lunch hour, so he was unable to speak with his children as they were at school. This appears to be an arbitrary and punitive decision by the prison. Why? • Tommy saw his family for two one hour periods in two months. As a former sailor, I know what it feels like to be separated from family. Does this point need a question? • He would receive ‘intelligence’ information that his wife and children were being threatened with acid attacks and that the police were in attendance at his home address. This poured more psychological anxiety into his already dire conditions as he was powerless to do anything. There is also no way of knowing that the ‘intelligence’ was genuine. The Leeds Crown Court proceedings were lacerated by the Appeal Court: • The court agrees that the judge should not have commenced the hearing of contempt proceedings that day. • Once the appellant had removed the video from Facebook, there was no longer sufficient urgency to justify immediate proceedings. In those circumstances it would have been preferable to adjourn, as had happened in the Canterbury proceedings. • No particulars of the contempt were formulated or put to the appellant. There was a muddle over the nature of the contempt being considered. In both the short explanation given by the judge of the general nature of the alleged contempt and the sentencing remarks, there was reference to matters that could not been a breach of the section 4(2) order. • The failure to follow Part 48 Crim PR was more than technical [66]. There was no clarity about what the appellant was admitting or on what basis he was being sentenced. • Finally, further difficulties arose from the limited opportunity that counsel had to investigate mitigation. There was little else which counsel could have done within the constraints under which he was working. The level of detail which could be provided to the court was very limited and there was no opportunity to obtain character references. A sense of proportion must be retained. Where a custodial term of considerable length is being imposed, it should not usually occur so quickly after the conduct which is complained of; a sentence of committal to immediate custody had been pronounced within five hours of the conduct taking place. • The order at Leeds Crown Court was also erroneously drawn up to suggest the appellant had been convicted of a criminal offence rather than having been committed for contempt of court. Errors like this have serious consequences upon the classification of prisoners, resulting in the deprivation of privileges and release on licence. In this case, it also resulted in the erroneous imposition of a victim surcharge. I have to ask who was responsible for this travesty? Did Judge Jeffrey Marsden act unilaterally or was he under the guidance from higher authority such as the Home Secretary, MI5, or even the Prime Minister herself? Given that Mrs. May has treated her fellow ministers with contempt over Brexit, she has a record of undue interference and underhanded tactics. I am disturbed by the paltry number of politicians who have taken up Tommy Robinson’s case. Does this current batch of politicians truly represent the interests of the working class or have they become so detached and corrupt of mind that they have no idea what ordinary people want and are concerned with? Labour, in particular, used to acclaim themselves as the party for the working classes. It seems not anymore. Tommy Robinson, to many I have met and spoken with, symbolizes the image of a working class hero. By contrast, the elites (political cohort, upper classes, main stream media) look down their nose at him while turning away from the atrocities of child rape in their own communities. What utter scoundrels! There is a sustained and orchestrated attack on free speech supported by the elites using highly dubious, subjective and contentious hate speech laws; the persecution of those who dare to speak up and the attempt to shut down and control the free exchange of data on the internet. Do you realize that if you kill off free speech, then you drive away investment? I have seen predictions that the UK’s economic position in the world will slip to below 20th in a few years time. This is not because of Brexit, but because of red tape and the image of an oppressive government. It is astonishing to see that what Tony Blair started a Conservative administration will complete. I have seen a rating of 16% for May’s version of Brexit. She has to go. This Government (and the Opposition) have brought the UK into disrepute by the abuse of Tommy Robinson in front of the whole world. Gag orders and attacks on internet information only make things worse. Please notethat Facebook and Twitter values have been plummeting recently because there are alternatives now available and people are switching. You people do not seem to understand. You have lost control and you are not getting it back while you continue to act like fascists. By the way, I am sure you know, that fascism and the Nazis came from the Left. Both the Conservatives and the Republican Parties have endured being wrongly labelled as these odious types for generations. Is it not time the education establishments taught the truth? Benito Mussolini called the Italian army: “a criminal organization designed to protect capitalism and bourgeois society.” That is the language of a Communist not a Conservative. Yours sincerely James Williams [simple-payment id=”918″] [contact-form][contact-field label=”Name” type=”name” required=”1″ /][contact-field label=”Email” type=”email” required=”1″ /][contact-field label=”Comment” type=”textarea” required=”1″ /][/contact-form]]]>

Move to Murder


I discovered on 14th June 2018, that journalist and campaigner, Tommy Robinson, had been moved to HMP Leicester with a Muslim population of over 70%. Already, death threats were  made against him and, apparently his first night spent there was one with prisoners banging constantly, baying for his harm. This transfer was on the authority of the new Home Secretary, Sajid Javid, ironically a Muslim minister in Theresa May’s cabinet. I should point out that Mrs. May has always been involved in the persecution of Tommy Robinson which seemed to coincide with when she was originally appointed as Home Secretary.
Tommy Robinson is a political prisoner and has been incarcerated at the pleasure of the UK Government. Indications are they want him dead, but dare not do it by blatantly assigning a state employee to carry out the execution, so they go for the cowardly option of putting him amongst groups who desperately want to kill him as part of their Jihad against dissent towards Allah and Mohammed and his open objection to the state’s covering up of child rape while displaying reluctance to bring those responsible to justice.

An Informal Death Sentence

Tommy Robinson’s transfer is a death sentence awaiting an executioner just as it was for Kevin Crehan, the non-violent, bacon-on-mosque ‘attacker’ who lasted just six months before his murder on 27th December 2016.
Kevin Crehan
To further illustrate his peril, Britain First leader, Paul Golding, was assaulted in prison in March 2018 at HMP Elmley, again by Muslim inmates.  The risks to those whom the establishment labels as ‘Far Right’ are well known, so the UK Government, with its obligation of exercising a ‘Duty of Care’, in reality seem not to care about the safety of political prisoners.

Myth of the Far Right

It seems to be a state sanctioned label to call anyone you do not like or who calls out the corruption within the system as ‘Far Right’. This is used in nearly all media statements and is a derogatory association that is never properly explained.
I have made contact with actual Far Right people to learn about their opinion of Tommy Robinson. They do not like him and claim that he is too Jew friendly.
The blatant disregard for basic human rights afforded to Kevin Crehan and Paul Golding is almost on a par with the Soviet and North Korean gulags. It is also a path that the UK Government is wilfully choosing to follow. They are using or, perhaps more accurately, misusing laws designed to control actual terrorists and highly subjective hate speech laws to silence mouth-pieces that try to point out the truth. They also seem happy to allow communist thugs to threaten and attack controversial political figures with impunity.
Tommy Robinson was focussing on the mass abuse by Pakistani and Muslim grooming gangs, but I have found that the paedophile issue goes even farther than them.

The Cancerous Web of Paedophilia

I am always reluctant to adopt a conspiracy theory position but, from other sources, there appears to exist, a sinister culture of child sexual slavery and exploitation that runs through the British establishment like a cancerous web. It is at every level of society and involves quite powerful and influential people within the Government, the police and the media. If only to exemplify this, it is worth watching the revelations of whistleblower and ex-CID police officer at Scotland Yard, John Wedger. He joins a list of courageous people who have risked life and everything to speak out. What part the paedo-monsters have to play in affecting the decision making process of the immoral and spineless Prime Minister May we are not privy to know. However, what is clear is that they are content to endanger the life of working class hero, Tommy Robinson, without fear of consequence.

Call to the Office of Cabinet Minister Penny Mordaunt

Penny Mordaunt1Deeply concerned with not just Tommy Robinson’s safety, but also possible implications of what will happen should he come to harm, I phoned my MP’s office (Rt Hon Penny Mordaunt MP) as soon as I learned of his transfer to a dangerous prison. I told them that her letter in reply to an earlier letter I had sent, concerning his initial incarceration, was almost identical to that of another complainant who had contacted his MP in Winchester. It suggested a standardized response.

I explained (and was assured that my message would be passed on) that I attended Free Speech and Tommy Robinson rallies, not simply to lend support, but also to find out what sort of people went to these events.
[wpvideo Vm1mgZ0k]
I have been unable to find any so-called Far Right people. I urged that this pejorative term be remove from reports as it was not what attendees are and is only inflaming resentment.
The ones I met at these rallies I shadowed, observed, listened to and engaged with. They were ordinary, working class people who care deeply about free speech and their children. They came to join with others; to listen to speakers and to express their dissatisfaction with the failure to act to protect children. No one is talking to them except people like Tommy Robinson. To simply dismiss them as Far Right is a grave mistake.
Opponents of Tommy Robinson have been challenged to find anything racist that he has said. They have failed.
Right now, the government and the UK establishment have lost legitimacy. His former criminal charges and convictions are being regarded as illegitimate and politically motivated. People are defiant and angry. Meanwhile the Government sets about targeting vulnerable individuals with bogus hate speech crimes. The main reason they maintain power is because the complicit media are stifling truth and reality. This situation is a powder keg.
Taking Tommy Robinson was done while he was alone. That itself was cowardly. To place him on death row surrounded by malevolent inmates is throwing him to the lions. It is an utter disgrace; an insult to what it means to be British and an embarrassment in the eyes of the world. Tommy Robinson is a political prisoner of the UK Government; a dangerously corrupt and incompetent regime that is dragging us toward civil war and, by so doing committing acts of treason against the British people.