Archive for maart, 2010

The New Deal

maart 31, 2010


THE REAL UNEMPLOYMENT RATE – New Deal

Euro Yank

http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000259332583

Pédocriminalité organisée: violation systématique des dispositions fondamentales du droit international au sein de l’Union

maart 30, 2010

Pédocriminalité organisée: violation systématique des dispositions fondamentales du droit international au sein de l’Union

Auteur: Fondation Princesses de Croÿ et Massimo Lancellotti – déposée le 30 novembre 2008 a 20h45, acceptée par la Commission des Pétitions au N°1696/2008.

Le fichier pédocriminel Zandvoort porte le nom de la ville hollandaise où Gerrit Ulrich, un citoyen allemand, commercialisait des photos de pornographie et torture d’enfants. Il a été découvert les 11 et 19 juin 1998, par le Werkgroep Morkhoven, ONG belge active à la recherche d’enfants disparus et sexuellement exploités, suite aux indications d’une victime belge du réseau. Les enquêteurs hollandais ont également pu saisir au domicile d’Ulrich, un CD contenant 90.000 photos, des agendas et carnets d’adresses.

Le Werkgroep Morkhoven craignait que les autorités belges classent le dossier sans justificatif valable, du fait qu’elles classaient systématiquement toutes les affaires d’enlèvements d’enfants dans le cadre de la production de ces images, en tant que fugues volontaires. L’ONG a alors décidé de remettre les CD aux autorités en plusieurs étapes. Le premier CD a été remis en juillet 1998, avec la presse internationale en témoins.

Mme Bernard-Pardaens, une bénévole de l’ONG, a réalisé une copie fragmentée des CD, pour exposer le dossier aux autres ONG et à la presse, tout en assurant de maintenir une différence entre ces CD et les originaux, pour les besoin de l’enquête. Elle a remis la copie fragmentée du premier CD à des journalistes et copie fragmentée des 21 CD à une organisation suisse CIDE (Comité International pour la Dignité de l’Enfant). Mme Bernard-Pardaens a été assassinée peu après, le 14 novembre 1998.

Le Werkgroep Morkhoven a envoyé le 9 avril 1999, la version intégrale du premier CD à divers chefs d’état, dont à Jacques Chirac, président de la République Française et sept CD supplémentaires au Roi des Belges. Le Conseil Supérieur de la Justice belge, confirme dans sa lettre du 21 février 2008, réf. N/07/0185/BDM/KDB, que ces sept CD ont été réceptionnés le 13 avril 1999 par la police judiciaire. Le dossier a été classé – secrètement – le 18 juillet 1999, au motif de ‘coupables inconnus’, suite à quoi il a été volé, CD compris, du Palais de justice !

Le porte-parole du Werkgroep Morkhoven, Marcel Vervloesem qui partageait son domicile avec le siège social de l’association, a été poursuivi pour avoir possédé ces CD. L’ONG a alors demandé une requête officielle pour remettre la totalité du matériel, afin d’éviter d’être condamnée pour son acte de civisme. Aucun des pays touchés par le réseau, n’ont accédé à cette demande. La France n’a jugé l’opportunité de l’enquête que le 24 février 2000, soit prés d’un an après avoir reçu le premier CD, quand la presse française a exposé le dossier.

Juan Miguel Petit, Rapporteur Spécial au Nations Unies sur la vente d’enfants, la prostitution des enfants et la pornographie impliquant des enfants, ne fait état que d’un seul CD de 8000 photos criminelles dans son rapport E/CN.4/2003/79/Add.2. Il n’a pas rencontré le Werkgroep Morkhoven, que les autorités belges et la presse contrôlée par l’état faisaient passer pour des bandits. En revanche, il précise concernant ce CD, que: “Interpol a indiqué (…) que les autorités néerlandaises l’avaient simplement envoyé aux pays qui lui paraissaient concernés”.

Le 4 avril 2001, à la demande du Procureur Bourlet de l’arrondissement judiciaire de Neufchâteau en Belgique, le Werkgroep Morkhoven a remis les vingt CD manquants, en pièces jointes à une plainte détaillée, avec des articles de presse, procès verbaux et interviews qui exposent des kidnappeurs d’enfants, des bordels et services d’escortes qui exploitent des enfants, des producteurs, des éditeur et publicistes de pédopornographie.

Un rapport d’INTERPOL du 23 août 2003 assure que les 20 CD remis renferment 93.081 photos. La police fédérale belge (PV n° 100470/03 d.d. 23-12-2003-DGJ-DJP-MH), assure que le nombre photos uniques (sans les doubles), est de 88.539, dont 70% des enfants sont clairement abusés.

Le premier CD n’a donc pas été joint à l’étude, mais Ulrich était en possession d’environ 191000 photos (93000 + 90000 + 8000), dont le nombre de doubles est inconnu, faute de transparence des enquêtes hollandaises et belges.

Le 20 mars 2003, la juge française Danielle RINGOT a décrété au sujet du seul premier CD (8000 photos) que ‘aucune infraction d’atteinte sexuelle sur mineur, de corruption de mineurs et de diffusion d’image de mineur à caractère pornographique n’a donc été caractérisée sur le territoire national (français).’

En résumé :

– La France a prononcé un non-lieu en l’absence de 88.539 pièces du dossier de base, qu’elle a encore morcelé en une multitude de petits dossiers, tous jugés séparément. Les parties civiles ont ensuite été condamnées sur base de ce jugement pour avoir voulu protéger leurs enfants, accusées de non présentation d’enfants, d’enlèvement parental et d’atteintes l’honneur.

– La Belgique a caché le vol des sept CD et dont la dernière trace date du 18 juillet 1999. Elle n’a jamais communiqué les vingt CD à la France, bien qu’essentielles à un procès équitable. Ce 19 novembre 2008, le Comité contre les tortures de l’ONU a confirmé la politique belge en matière de la traite d’être humains (CAT/C/SR. 860) et noté les “lacunes de la coopération internationale afin de traduire en justice les auteurs des infractions”.

– La Hollande a maintenu le dossier Zandvoort séparé du dossier Brongersma, du nom d’un sénateur hollandais qui s’est suicidé en découvrant que le commerce de photos d’enfants nus qu’il avait initié, avait débouché sur un commerce de photos de tortures et de meurtre d’enfants. Il figurait aux listes de Zandvoort. Peu avant son suicide, il avait écrit à Marcel Vervloesem du Werkgroep Morkhoven, pour lui signaler avoir communiqué sa “collection” à la police allemande.

– La Suisse a piégé plusieurs mères françaises par une commission rogatoire pour identifier des enfants français sur une copie fragmentée des CD, reçu de l’organisation CIDE. La Suisse n’a pas demandé la version intégrale au Werkgroep Morkhoven et n’a pas envoyé la copie fragmentée aux autorités françaises, pour que l’enquête sur des citoyens français puisse se faire en France.

La Suisse a donné un asile politique temporaire à ses mères, puis a refusé l’asile politique définitif. Elles ont alors toutes été arrêtées en Suisse, par INTERPOL et emprisonnées, en vertu d’une condamnation française pour enlèvement parental. La garde des enfants a alors systématiquement été confiée aux pères, que ces enfants avaient mis en cause pour abus sexuels.

– INTERPOL, qui a été très efficace pour arrêter les mères françaises en Suisse, semble avoir été très inefficace pour exposer l’ampleur du dossier au Rapporteur spécial de l’ONU.

Le 10 février 2005, en réponse à la pétition N° 186/2004 au Parlement Européen sur le sabotage des enquêtes judiciaires relatives aux réseaux pédocriminels par les autorités belges, la Commission a dit:

‘Si l’Union Européenne possède donc – sur base de l’article 31 TUE – une compétence législative dans le domaine de la lutte contre l’exploitation sexuelle des enfants et la pédopornographie, il n’en est pas de même pour la conduite des enquêtes judiciaires dans des cas individuels. Celle-ci, selon l’article 33 du TUE, incombe aux Etats membres. Par conséquent, la Commission n’est pas habilitée à se prononcer sur la manière selon laquelle les enquêtes judiciaires sur les réseaux pédocriminels sont menées en Belgique.’

Il ne s’agit pas de “cas individuels” mais d’un crime contre l’humanité, dont le nombre de victimes en dix ans est passé de cent mille à deux millions. En effet, depuis, les cartes de crédit utilisées à l’achat des photos d’Ulrich, ont contribué à l’opération Koala en 2007, dans 19 pays, et à la saisie de 2 millions d’images semblables.

Des dizaines de victimes et témoins en Belgique, France, Hollande, Portugal etc., se plaignent de simulations d’erreurs judiciaires identiques : manœuvres dilatoires prolongeant les procédures ; disparition ou élimination des pièces de la défense ; expertise de psychiatres qui inversent les rôles entre le plaignant et le mis en cause ; fautes de procédure en série ; incarcérations et internements en violation des lois nationales, et plusieurs cas de torture.

Plus grave encore : les victimes se plaignent de l’impossibilité d’obtenir de l’assistance des services publics ou du bataillon d’ONG qui se présentent comme actives en le domaine. Les rares ONG qui leur apportent de l’aide sont immédiatement persécutées, sans obtenir d’assistance des autorités.

L’interview à la télévision belge de Dirk Tahon, qui explique les modalités du trafic d’enfants de son bistrot en Belgique pour la Hollande (‘Faits Divers’ RTBF – mars 1998), fait apparaître que ce ne sont pas ces bistrotiers qui maintiennent les réseaux, mais les juges qui les épargnent et simulent des erreurs judiciaires pour anéantir les plaignants.

Marcel Vervloesem, qui a exposé le réseau Zandvoort, a été condamné à 4 ans de prison pour de faits qu’il est reconnu médicalement incapable de commettre. Le ministère de la justice belge lui refuse les soins médicaux nécessaires à sa survie, le temps requis à la Cour Européenne des Droits de l’Homme ne puisse le libérer. Il n’a quasi aucune chance de survivre le temps que la Commission réponde à cette pétition.

Le premier tribunal qui a condamné Marcel Vervloesem en l’absence de 42 pièces de la défense, a libéré Filip De Graeve, collaborateur direct de l’actuel ministre de l’intérieur belge, dans une affaire comprenant un réseau de prostitution et la commande d’un enfant moldave à 1000 euros la nuit, sous prétexte d’une “incomplétude qui viole les droits de la défense”.

Maria-Pia Maoloni, de nationalité belge, en vacances en Italie, a été condamnée pour enlèvement parental en Belgique, puis libérée de ces accusations en Italie. Entre-temps la garde de ses filles a été accordé au père avant qu’il n’ait a répondre de la procédure pénal, l’aînée lui reprochant la coupure de son hymen à l’âge de 4 ans.

Patricia Poupard est l’une des mères françaises, qui s’est constitué partie civile dans l’affaire Zandvoort en France et a été piégée par la Suisse. L’asile politique temporaire et le non-lieu en l’absence de 88.539 pièces au dossier, lui ont coûté dix mois et demi de détention préventive, assortie d’un internement en violation des lois françaises, malgré une analyse de sang qui démontre que son fils était atteint d’une maladie vénérienne à l’âge de 7 ans. Patricia Poupard a récemment été condamnée à des dommages moraux au père, pour avoir demandé la garde son fils, encore sur base du non-lieu qui a innocenté ce père, en l’absence de 88.539 pièces de base. Il obtient actuellement de lui faire saisir son allocation de survie, par des huissiers de justice qui ne prétendent pas savoir que cette allocation n’est pas saisissable par la loi française.

Les enquêteurs portugais qui ont exposé le Dr McCann comme étant la meurtrière de sa fille disparue, ont également obtenu la condamnation de Mme Cipriano à 16 ans de prison, en l’accusant d’avoir découpée sa fille et l’avoir donné à manger aux cochons, pour expliquer que l’enfant et son corps avaient disparus.

En 2002, la Belgique a participé à l’opération policière internationale ‘Hamlet’, suite à l’identification par INTERPOL de Pascal Taveirne, citoyen belge, sur un film pornographique où il abuse de ses filles. Il a été maintenu libre de continuer à les exploiter jusqu’en 2006. Il avait alors à nouveau été identifié par INTERPOL, sur un film produit par un citoyen Italien, présumé par la police italienne comme l’un des principaux producteurs pour le réseau Zandvoort. Les filles ont été confiées à leur mère, qui ne les avait jamais protégé de ce commerce.

En France aussi, la justice se refuse à une enquête et charge et à décharge d’un haut magistrat français, coqueluche de la protection de l’enfance, qu’une analyse biométrique a identifié à 99.03% comme étant un adulte figurant sur une photo du fichier Zandvoort avec un garçon de 11 ans, tout deux culotte baissée.

La liste de ces affaires est sans fin et fait apparaître sept des onze actes constitutifs de crime contre l’humanité, définit l’article 7 du Statut de Rome. Ces actes sont vraiment commis ‘dans le cadre d’une attaque systématique dirigée contre une population civile et en connaissance de l’attaque’. Ils comprennent:

Meurtre;
Emprisonnement ou autre forme de privation grave de liberté physique en violation des dispositions fondamentales du droit international
Torture ;
Viol, esclavage sexuel, prostitution forcée;
la persécution d’un groupe identifiable pour des motifs d’ordre sexiste et… pécuniaire;
Disparition forcée de personnes;
Autres actes inhumains de caractère analogue causant intentionnellement de grandes souffrances ou des atteintes graves à l’intégrité physique ou à la santé physique ou mentale.
Nous souhaitons connaître la position de l’Europe face au maintien dans des fonctions publiques, de magistrats et fonctionnaires, qui ignorent les dispositions fondamentales du droit international ; la possibilité d’aménagement des lois européennes pour lutter contre l’exploitation sexuelle d’enfants et la possibilité d’octroyer une aide réelle aux victimes.

Les Organisations Non Gouvernementales partenaires de la Fondation Princesses de Croÿ et Massimo Lancellotti croient en la nécessité d’un service de médiation européen pour faire le pont entre autorités locales, polices internationales et les victimes ou témoins de la pédocriminalité organisée.

http://droitfondamental.eu/003-petition_EU_parlement_zandvoort-3.htm

L’hébergement des enfants prioritairement égalitaire

maart 29, 2010

Loi du 18 juillet 2006

Mercredi 6 Septembre 2006. Un article de Gilles CARNOY

La loi du 18 juillet 2006 le dit désormais clairement : le tribunal doit examiner « prioritairement » la possibilité de fixer l’hébergement de l’enfant de manière égalitaire entre ses parents

http://www.businessandlaw.be/article1183.html

CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE: OPEN LETTER TO MINISTER DE CLERCK

maart 25, 2010
CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE: OPEN LETTER TO MINISTER DE CLERCK.


Brussels, February 24th, 2010

Stefaan De Clerck,
Minister of Justice,
Waterloolaan 115
1000 Brussels.

Dear Sir,

In annex to this letter I am including a copy of the letter which we sent to the Prosecutor General of Antwerp. May I please know whether an inquiry has been carried out on the thirty minutes relating to moral offences committed against minors in which appear the name of the main accuser in this case, i.e. of Victor Vervloesem, the half brother of Marcel Vervloesem. Mr Victor Vervloesem was elected member of the Town Council in 2006, and is at present the President of the Commission for Security and Justice of the city of Herentals.

I have again and again sent you a copy of the aforementioned letter, but I have never had the honour to receive a response to it, nor to that of August 7th, 2009 relating to this matter.

This seems rather strange, in so far as the complaints of Mr Victor Vervloesem and his friends had been given due attention by the judicial authorities and by the press which back them fully, although they are only based on rumours of torture and rapes, which would date back to twenty years ago.

Besides, although Marcel Vervloesem had been cleared of these accusations, it is the media campaign launched and triggered by these accusations that contributed to the hostile atmosphere around his person and that drove him to prison, where he has been rotting for eighteen months now. This campaign aimed at libeling Mr Vervloesem for years and years as a “self-proclaimed hunter of child pornography” and a “child abuser”. His judicial file has been tampered with and falsified. The same is true with the file containing evidence of the Zandvoort pedopornographic affair. Moreover, Mr Vervloesem’s health is extremely precarious. All this shows how unjust and unjustified Mr Vervloesem’s imprisonment is .

Yours sincerely

Jan Boeykens
President of ASBL Werkgroep Morkhoven

Werkgroep Morkhoven vzw-asbl
Faiderstraat 10
1060 Sint-Gillis
nr. 443.439.55
Tel.: 0032 (0) 2 537 49 97
WerkgroepMorkhoven@gmail.com
postmaster@droitfondamental.eu
http://werkgroep-morkhoven.skynetblogs.be/
http://www.droitfondamental.eu/

——

OPEN LETTER TO THE PROSECUTOR GENERAL OF ANTWERP.
PRESS RELEASE
It is absolutely necessary to start Marcel Vervloesem’s trial again from scratch at the Antwerp Court of Appeal .
Official reports and research accounts subtracted from the file are suddenly throwing quite another light on the Turnhout trial of October 21st, 2006.
The Court of Appeal of Antwerp
For the attention of the Prosecutor General
Waalse Kaai
2000 Antwerp
Dear Sir,

Subject: Marcel Vervloesem’s trial.

Each and every one has the right to an equitable trial. As you may see, there are some unacceptable things going on in Turnhout, within the framework of an impartial and independent Justice. One thing is definitely clear from now on, much before the pronunciation of the verdict by the Turnhout Criminal Court: one will have to redo the whole trial against Marcel Vervloesem which has been dragging on for nine years now.
Indeed, as a consequence of various ‘errors’ made within the administration of the Turnhout Public Prosecutions, several items of the Vervloesem file which carry the same number as the file-documents of which they are part, were subtracted from the original file.
If the criminal court pronounces a decision on November 15th, 2006, there is strong likelihood that a complaint from the defendant about these missing documents, will cause every procedure carried out in this affair to be radically questioned. As a matter of fact, every indicted person enjoys the basic right to access each and every document belonging to his or her own judicial file, in order to be in a position to present his or her defence before the court.
The Turnhout Public Prosecutions forgot to add a 69-page compilation to the TU.52.98.101758-04 file. This compilation was deposited upon receipt of reception in the office of the King’s Prosecutor in Turnhout to be attached to the Vervloesem file. This receipt was signed by the deputy-secretary to the Prosecutor.
Marcel Vervloesem had been heard on April 15th, 2004 upon the order of the Office of Public Prosecutor of the Turnhout judiciary police force in relation with the facts mentioned in the TU.45.98.100301 / 2001 and TU.20.49.100138.00 judiciary files.
During this interview the judiciary police force added some documents meant for the defense to both mentioned files.
Neither the aforementioned minutes, nor the documents meant for the defense have ever been added to the criminal files.
On January 16th, 2004 the King’s Prosecutor of Louvain sent  the Turnhout Public Prosecutions several documents relating to the  TU.37.10102448 / 1998 criminal file. These documents included several facts that cleared Marcel Vervloesem from the accusations carried against him.
These documents remained untraceable for several months.
The inquiry led by the High Court of Justice concluded that the complaint about the disappearance of these documents as well as the one relating to the minutes were justified.
The minutes written by the Police of Haacht relating to the  TU.37.101024448 / 1998 criminal file were also missing in the criminal file in question.
The letters sent years ago to the Public Prosecutions of Turnhout about the TU.37.10102448/1998 penal file, threw quite another light on this affair, and were not included either in the penal file in question. Surprisingly enough, they were letters which regarded as a child abuser, not Marcel Vervloesem, but rather his main accuser, Victor Vervloesem. The examining magistrate who carried out the investigation relating to the TU.37.L7.103093/05 penal filehas never put at the disposal of the suspect and of his lawyer the files which he had collected as part of this penal file and had subjected to the attention of the psychologist, Mr Theunis. Nevertheless, it was indeed on the report of this psychologist that the examining magistrate based his decision not to hear the witnesses for the defence that Marcel Vervloesem had wanted to use in his favour.The investigating officers of the TT.37. L7.103093 criminal file used various minutes with the respective numbers. However, they were not added to the TU.37 37. L7.103093 file, for a possible consultation by the defendant. It is true, indeed, that these minutes could be of use for the defence of Mr Vervloesem against the accusations he is subjected to.

The list of the above-mentioned official reports would already be enough for invalidating the procedure led in the criminal trial against Marcel Vervloesem.
Some jurists even speak of violation of the basic rights of the defendant and of an attempt on his right to a fair trial.
Thus, it is allowed to state that because of the elements listed hereafter, the juridical process is subject to the risk of going astray and to becoming completely derailed.

Not long agoit indeed appeared that the Turnhout Public Prosecutions had already been in the know for years owing to the fact that the main accuser had himself been guilty of sexual offences against children.The governor of the province of Antwerp, Mr PAULUS, had written at that time that the King’s Prosecutor of Turnhout had informed him that he did not know about possible acts of sexual abuses against children by the main accuser in this affair, Victor Vervloesem”. (Letter dated October 17th, 2005, ref. GE/PAUGUV/1MSOJQOFMJG.DOC).

The victims and people wronged by Victor Vervloesem’s criminal acts, declare  today that the King’s Prosecutor protected this man and that he was in a much better position than onyone else to know what was and is going on with Victor Vervloesem’s sexual offences. According to them, the Prosecutor protected Victor Vervloesem, because he could use him in his determination to take activist Marcel Vervloesem to court.

Here is a list of the facts that the King’s Prosecutor of Turnhout would have supposedly been unaware of and that his Office kept hidden to the public for years and years.

1) Letter of L.V. from Herentals, dated July 20th, 2001, and which is currently part of the  TU.37.98.102448 / 98 file:
“Johan D. told me that Victor Vervloesem had urged him to lodge a complaint against Marcel. I myself know that Victor Vervloesem had an affair with Johan D. Johan D. confessed to me that Marcel had never done any harm to him”.

2) Letter of L.C. from Haarlem, dated June 24th, 2001, and sent to Walter Wellens of the judiciary Police of Turnhout:
“I was a victim of sexual interfering and touching from Victor Vervloesem when I was 12 . I lodged a complaint to the Public Prosecutions of Turnhout around February 14th, 2001”.

3) Registered letter of January 14th, 2001, sent to the Turnhout Prosecutor .
“I read in the newspaper the accusations made by Victor Vervloesem and his sidekicks against his half-brother Marcel. I want to lodge complaint against Victor Vervloesem for assaulting the physical integrity of my person. Victor Vervloesem sexually abused me when I was a child. He had then tied me naked to a tree, threatening to cut my penis . He sexually abused M.C. as well.’

4) Letter of C.E. from Herentals, dated January 28th, 2004, and sent to various authorities and various lawyers:
” I read about the accusations of Victor Vervloesem and his sidekicks against his half-brother Marcel in newspapers. I would like to condemn those accusations against Marcel.My 14-year old son and his friend have recently become the victims of Victor Vervloesem who masturbated in front of my son and tried to abuse my son and his friend”.

5) Letter in the hands of the local police of Herentals. Report N°107025/05 sent by L.V. of Morkhoven: “Victor Vervloesem had manoeuvered with other people to lodge a complaint against Marcel Vervloesem by using a Community centre. Complaints against Marcel Vervloesem had been entirely made up by Victor Vervloesem”.

6) Letter written by E.M. of Wakkerzele, dated 13th September 2005 and lodged at the Herentals Police station:
“Victor Vervloesem sexually assaulted a child under 18 by the name of N.C.. He did the same criminal act against S.D..”

7) Official report written by the local police of Neteland. Interview with M.V.A. from Wiekevorst:
“I know that Victor Vervloesem sexually assaulted child N.C as well as child S.D.S., and that he tried to touch their sexual organs”

8. Official record of the Police of Heist o.d. Berg, dated 13th December 2004.. Ref. ME.18.L7.104977 / 2004, interview with ST.D. from Arendonk.
” I can tell you that I was a victim of sexual interference and touching from Victor Vervloesem in the vicinity of the “stekesvijver” in Morkhoven.He tried to touch my genitals . The facts occurred in the presence of my friend NC from Morkhoven.

9) Letter sent on August 20th, 2004 by D.S. of Herentals.
” During the summer, my friend and myself had gone at some point to find shelter in a shack, because it was pouring with rain. Suddenly, Victor Vervloesem turned up. He asked us if we felt like sucking a bit. We thought that he was refering to cigarettes. Victor then lowered his trousers, he began masturbating under our eyes, and at some point he tried to touch my penis. We ran away, at that precise moment”

10) Official record of the Police of Herentals dated 28.04.2005 – Ref.103493/05, interview with N.C. of Herentals.
“Victor Vervloesem committed sexual offences under my own eyes. He began masturbating. I already made a statement together with my friend in your office department.

11) Letter of A.P. from Antwerp sent on July 25th, 2005 to the police of Herentals- Record N°1.7025 / 05:
“Victor Vervloesem sexually abused small boy N.K and his boyfriend. The father of N.K exposed these facts to many authorities. But according to this father, Victor Vervloesem is highly protected by Mayor P.”

12) Letter sent by M.V. of Turnhout to the Public Prosecutions of Turnhout about affair TU.37.10 / 102448 / 1998:
“I knew Victor Vervloesem and Johan D. for a long period of time. Johan told me at that time that he had been raped by Victor Vervloesem at the age of 13. I then advised him to tell everything to his parents, but he did not dare”.

13) Letter sent on 8.7.2005 by H.D.W. from Hulshout, to the police of Herentals and added to the TU.37 37. L7.103093.05 file:
“Victor Vervloesem committed moral offences against Nick S. The child has told me everything. His father reported the facts to the Public Prosecutions of Turnhout.”

14) Letter of 14.12.05. from M.S. of Westerlo, included in the TU.37.10 / 102448 / 98 file:
It is possible that the involuntary drugs-taking by N.C. is linked to the rape perpetrated against him by Victor Vervloesem.”

15) Letter of M.A. Heist o.d. Berg dated  18.05.98 – Tu. 37/10/102448.98:
“I had been told myself that if I ever had problems with the justice, I had to declare that Marcel Vervloesem had threatened to rape me. I then had to make contact with Victor Vervloesem, who had obviously a lot of power in the world of Justice. I had never agreed to play that kind of game, because I knew that Victor Vervloesem was the rapist of two of my friends.”

16) Letter of C.B. from Herentals, dated 16th February 2006-TU.37.10.102448.98:
” The small boy by the name N. de Morkhoven told me during his visits , that he was a victim of sexual interference and touching from  Victor Vervloesem. His parents reported these facts to the police.”

17) Registered letter from the family H. de Morkhoven, dated September 14th, 2004, and sent to the Prosecutor of Turnhout. “I forbade  Victor Vervloesem to see my young son, because he committed sexual offences in front of my son and other boys.”

18) Registered letter of the family H. de Morkhoven, sent to Victor Vervloesem. TU.37.10 / 102448-98:
“Much to my indignation I have heard about the sexual crimes you have committed on my son and his friends. As a father I forbid you to approach my son again. I heard from my son and his friend how you wish to get them involved in your perverse practices towards teen-agers. I have informed the lawyer of your brother on your case.”

19) Letter of the family H. de Morkhoven sent to a number of authorities of the country, on February 22, 2004:
“Victor Vervloesem c/o OCMW in Herentals. Victor Vervloesem committed sexual crime on my young son. My son was heard on these facts, fourteen days ago. I am very much concerned by the fact that this person who is a child abuser is part of the OCMW Council.”

20) Letter officially recorded by P.W. of Westerlo at the Office of the civil cases of Westerloo, on February 23rd. Reference: 2004-TU.37.10 / 102448-98:
“I received 10,000 Belgian francs from the hand of Victor Vervloesem to lodge a complaint against his brother Marcel for attempts on public decency. Yet, I have never experienced any sexual interference or touching from Marcel, but rather from Eddy B. who also took pictures of these scenes. Johan D. got the sum of 15,000 Belgian francs from Victor Vervloesem for lodging the same complaint. He received some more money, because they also asked him to repeat this complaint in front of the cameras of the televised channel VTM.”

21) Report dated  9.01.2007 of the Service of Investigations of the Zuiderkempen Police -TU.L3.100118-2006, following a meeting with D.L.M.:

“My friend C. of Herentals and myself were raped by Victor Vervloesem of Morkhoven. The facts occurred in Morkhoven. Victor Vervloesem masturbated in front of us. He asked us if we wanted to jerk him off. He held his penis in his hands. He was masturbating.
We related the facts to N.V’s mother who advised us to lodge a complaint. The police recorded the statements.”

22) Letter of N.V. of Morkhoven, dated of 8.1.2006, inserted in the file TU.37 37. L7.1030093-0″:
” My mate told me that he had been raped by Victor Vervloesem. There was another small boy with the victim.”

23) Report LE.11 11. L8.103060-2003-dated  5.7.2005- Ref.Tu.37.10 / 102448 / 98F:
‘Victor Vervloesem had arranged a few appointments with other people at Eddy B’s house to fabricate complaints against Marcel Vervloesem. Victor Vervloesem blackmailed P.W. because he knew about some thefts which P.W had committed. P.W. told me that Victor Vervloesem had encouraged him to lodge false complaints for indecent assault against Marcel Vervloesem. He had allegedly given in to pressure, but he withdrew his accusations afterwards.”

25) Report 100572-03, dated 16.-4.2003 – For the attention of the Inspection Department of the Federal Police. Interview with W.H.:
“Victor Vervloesem tricked P.W. into lodging a complaint against his brother Marcel. P.W. had even showed me some documents which proved these facts. He told me the whole story. He seemed to be unaware that I was a policeman who operated under civil cover . As a matter of fact, I had exposed everything and I had personally handed over to you all the documents which P.W. had given me. The complaint against Marcel Vervloesem for indecent assault was a complete fabrication.

26) Report number 10101017 of the Judiciary Police force of Turnhout TU.37.98.102448 / 98, concerning J.V.S., the mother of A.G.:
“I was supposed to lodge a complaint against Marcel Vervloesem. I did not understand why. They promised to give us some money if we wanted to
testify against Marcel Vervloesem.”

27) Letter of W.V.S in the hands of Lawyer D.DF.:
“They had asked me to leave a small bag with drugs and some small bamboo sticks in Marcel Vervloesem’s house. In return, I was offered some drugs.”

The facts listed above speak for themselves.

This indeed explains the stubborn refusal to allow the consultation of all the criminal files of Marcel Vervloesem.Thanks to his knowledge of the items of the file, the King’s Prosecutor knew perfectly what happened, contrary to what the Governor of Antwerp stated.

It is now very clear why the Public Ministry of Turnhout had omitted to carry out the order of criminal judge F. Caers to subject Victor Vervloesem and his sidekicks to the test of the lies detector .

On the contrary, Marcel Vervloesem had been forced to go through the test of lies detector at the federal police office. Later, Marcel Verlvloesem himself asked to have a second test of lies detector done by some specialists from the University of Milan. Both tests revealed that Marcel had told the truth.

Apart from this, we note that:
– The report from the forensic medecine department declares that  Marcel Vervloesem’s statements show a very high degree of reliability .
– The expert-psychiatrists stated that Marcel Vervloesem was a totally normal person.
– In the psychological report written by the criminal authorities, Marcel is described as a person without any obsession for children.
– The legal investigation carried out on Marcel Vervloesem’s computer did not find out any law infringement from Mr Vervloesem.
– The inquiry performed by the federal Police laboratory of Turnhout in Marcel Vervloesem’s house, did not produce any DNA proof against Marcel Vervloesem’s bona fide.
– One of the psychiatrists wrote in his report: “It is because Marcel Vervloesem is a member of the ASBL Morkhoven and because he is an activist that he is out of favour at the Turnhout magistracy “.
– Prosecutor Bourlet clearly declared that he would not sue Marcel Vervloesem for the possession and the delivery of CD-ROMS belonging to the Zandvoort pedopornographic network.

It follows from all this that Marcel Vervloesem was for many years publicly and wrongly condemned by a big part of the Flemish press. A case in point which proves this fact  is an article published by Ivo Meulemans in the newspapers Het Nieuwsblad and De Gentenaar, on 19.10.2006. The article is entitled ‘The  pedopornography hunter proves to have some paedophile sexual tastes. Marcel Vervloesem is a mentally unbalanced person’.

The articles published in the newspapers De Morgen and De Standaard do not make any reference to the results favourable to Marcel Vervloesem which are mentioned in the 36-page report written by Dr. Cosyns. This doctor notes among other things that the “media (as Marcel  himself notes) will be more and more set on ruining him”.

It is incidently obvious that the details of Marcel Vervloesem’s trial as well as the statements of the Public Prosecutor, Peter Vander Flaas have been deliberately distorted by the aforementioned newspapers.

Yours sincerely,

Jan Boeykens, President of ASBL Werkgroep Morkhoven

http://werkgroep-morkhoven.skynetblogs.be/


Governed by criminals

maart 20, 2010

A10-786

Many people (and worldwide) are living in the illusion that they are governed by respectable politicians.
They are seeing blind and accept that they are manipulated, exploited and abused by criminals.

—-

Jewish Voice for Peace

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is a threat to Israelis, Palestinians, Americans, and anyone who wants peace and security in the Middle East. During a March 2010 Vice Presidential visit to Israel, …

Facebook: Israel Defense Forces had to be called off

maart 5, 2010

(NEWSER) – A West Bank raid by the Israel Defense Forces had to be called off after a soldier posted details of the operation on his Facebook page. “On Wednesday,” the status update read, “we are cleaning out ” a village, which the soldier named. “Today an arrest operation, tomorrow an arrest operation and then, please God, home.” The gabby grunt was booted from his elite unit and sent to jail for 10 days.

The posting of inappropriate or classified material by soldiers has become widespread enough that the IDF has launched an education campaign and is considering new regulations, the Jerusalem Postreports. An intelligence officer says information security is essential. “We see more activity among enemies on the Internet. All one needs is Internet access and to search for a few key words and begin collecting intelligence.”

http://www.newser.com/story/82444/soldiers-facebook-post-derails-israeli-raid.html

Boycott Israel

maart 5, 2010

Omar Barghouti asks Jewish Federation to a debate on BDS

Posted on March 4 2010 by Cecilie Surasky under BDSCensorship.

Omar Barghouti got a “No thank you” response from the San Francisco area Jewish Community Relations Council head Rabbi Doug Kahn, the key author of recent McCarthyite Federation funding guidelines, but he did finally get his BDS debate– with well-known peacenik Rabbi Arthur Waskow–on Democracy Now. Meanwhile, here’s Barghouti’s Open Letter from Kabobfest:

by Omar Barghouti, a leader of the international movement to boycott Israel

Open Letter to Rabbi Doug Kahn

Executive Director of the Jewish Community Relations Council

It has recently come to my attention that pending the advice of a working group of which you were a member, the Jewish Community Federation has chosen to itself boycott groups advocating a Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) program targeting Israel. As one of the founding members of the global BDS campaign, I cannot but note the irony of your use of boycott as a tool to suppress views that support the boycott against Israel. I can only conclude that you do approve of the efficacy and appropriateness of boycotts, as a non-violent form of activism and a catalyst for change, but condemn them when the change they set out to achieve is related to ending Israel’s occupation as well as its grave violations of international law and Palestinian rights.

For years, Palestinian civil society has been advocating the tool of boycotts, divestment and sanctions, or BDS, as a means of challenging Israel’s impunity and redressing the wrongs done to the Palestinian people by the violent and oppressive Israeli policies and actions. Wouldn’t you agree, given you in-principle embrace of boycotts, that this effective, non-violent form of struggle is far superior, morally speaking, to the “tactics” of white phosphorous, Walls, siege, forced displacement and apartheid?

However, while we may agree on the methods, I think there we hold sharply conflicting views about who the targets of a boycott should be and what violations of human rights would necessitate such methods. The Jewish Community Federation has chosen to flex its boycotting muscle to intimidate and muzzle dissenters and to suppress free speech by cutting off funds to (and negate the acceptability of) progressive Jewish activists and intellectuals who dare to believe that the Jewish community in the US is not a monolithic herd, and who put their commitment to human rights and their moral consistency obligations ahead of any perceived “tribal” allegiances. Through its sweeping threats, the JCF is in fact attempting to stifle the richly diverse views of Jewish Americans that seek to challenge, via BDS-related tactics, the legitimacy of Israel’s occupation and its egregious infringements of international law and human rights.

Is there any reasonable argument that can justify your position in support of a boycott against a documentary about a brave young human rights activist called Rachel, who was crushed to death by a bulldozer demolishing a Palestinian home? Isn’t it more appropriate, ethically speaking, to call for divestment from the company that manufactures this bulldozer knowing well its use in violations of international law? Isn’t the state that uses such bulldozers, among other means, on a regular basis to demolish thousands of Palestinian homes and impose other egregious forms of collective punishment against millions of Palestinian civilians a more worthy target for boycott?

Those such as Nobel Peace Prize winner Desmond Tutu, and many leading international cultural figures, academics, trade unions, NGOs and social movement actors who endorse the Palestinian civil society advocated BDS campaign believe that boycotts ought to be used not to suppress those who reveal the truth and stand up to injustice and oppression but, on the contrary, to end oppression and impunity. Boycotts ought to be used to bring about just peace, security and equal rights for all human beings irrespective of their identities.

Perhaps we can discuss the merits of our respective positions by engaging in a public debate, another hallmark of civil society. Though friends and colleagues in the Bay Area have searched long and hard, they have had such difficulty finding someone willing to debate whether boycotting Israel is justified or not. I turn to you because I see that you at least in principle agree on the appropriateness of boycott as a tactic. A debate, by definition, will allow both sides to be equally expressed without any a priori bias towards one position or the other. One possible title for this debate can be: BDS is counterproductive to the pursuit of just peace in the Middle East. Obviously, your side would defend the motion, while I would oppose it.

There is a room reserved at UC Berkeley’s Law School this Wednesday night, March 3rd at 6:30 If you agree, this will be a good chance to have a civil, mutually-respectful debate before the public. If you cannot make it, I hope that you can suggest a colleague of yours who can participate in such a debate to explain your Federation’s position.

If this is agreeable to you, colleagues in the Bay Area can get in touch with you or those you suggest to iron out the details.

Sincerely,

Omar Barghouti

http://www.muzzlewatch.com/2010/03/04/omar-barghouti-asks-jewish-federation-to-debate-on-bds/

http://www.facebook.com/JewishVoiceforPeace?ref=nf