PrisonPlanet Forum

Globalization and the plan for New Word Order => Missing Children/Torture/Rape/Satanic Ritual Abuse => CASE STUDY: Baby Cheyenne and the CPS Terrorist Network => : ImpeachBarrySoetoro October 07, 2010, 07:04:04 PM

: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: ImpeachBarrySoetoro October 07, 2010, 07:04:04 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OvZRM-P46rI
: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: Dig October 07, 2010, 07:09:11 PM
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread617765/pg1

Here's pretty much the story:

He claims after his kid was born, Child Protection Service (not the organization he names, but the same idea) came and took her away. Claims the nurses took the kid under false pretenses to give to these agents.

Says they put a security guard outside their room to "follow his every move"

He claims the affidavit they gave him stated it was because he is with a "militia" group the oath keepers.

To me, it doesn't sound like the whole story.
: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: adissenter2 October 07, 2010, 08:16:43 PM
this needs to be looked into fully & asap
: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: ImpeachBarrySoetoro October 07, 2010, 08:41:49 PM
Janvrin6228
2 minutes ago

Court is next week, I hope I can find a GOOD lawyer that will take this pro bono. These bastards are trying to say that my daughter is not safe with me because I am an OathKeeper WTF!!! IT ISN'T A DAMN MILITIA WHAT DON'T THEY COMPREHEND ABOUT THIS!!!
: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: Dig October 07, 2010, 08:46:53 PM
this needs to be looked into fully & asap

agreed. another oathkeeper was served a search warrant based on trumped up charges and was then found innocent.

but this needs to be looked into fully and the greater issue of CPS in general needs to continue to be exposed.
: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: AncientChild October 07, 2010, 09:40:00 PM
Yep, we need to get this one viral, if the whole story is being told. I posted a reply on Youtube encouraging them to get a copy of any paperwork they might have which states the reason(s) for the child's removal.
: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: Dig October 07, 2010, 09:45:30 PM
Has this claim been verified yet?
: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: Dig October 07, 2010, 09:54:40 PM
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread617765/pg1

Considering that the oathkeeper's website has the categories and obvious space for such a story, I am not going to say suspicious yet, but curious as to why it's not there. Could be a lot of cross checking going on to verify before they post it. None of us have to commit to a view until there is more info. And even then, you know how that can be.
: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: ImpeachBarrySoetoro October 07, 2010, 10:40:16 PM
http://dprogram.net/2010/10/07/government-agents-seize-oath-keepers-new-born-from-hospital/

UPDATE:

Watchman Noyes
I have a copy of the affidavit and I can tell you that it says verbatim these words “The Division became aware and confirmed that Mr. Irish associated with a militia known as “Oath Keepers”, and had purchased several different types of weap…ons including a rifle, handgun and a taser.” (none of which is illegal, and anyone who has ever been to oathkeepers website knows that they are not a “militia”. I will not post the affidavit as it is still sealed information and I would be violating Mr. Irish’s rights in doing so. If people have questions and they are a part of the media, then I can put them in touch with him. Otherwise for now, this is all the information that we have.
: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: tritonman October 07, 2010, 10:54:59 PM
The affidavit is going to be posted at infowars and over at Ron Paul forums just as soon as it is faxed in .  Someone is supposed to be contacting Alex I heard.  Check out Ron Paul forums thread.
: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: ImpeachBarrySoetoro October 07, 2010, 11:04:15 PM
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?p=2921065#post2921065

Note from Stewart Rhodes:

Here is my statement for now:

We are doing all we can to confirm and document this. But if is IS accurate, and a newborn child was ripped from her mother's arms because the parents were "associated" with Oath Keepers by simply being members of our online ning discussion forum, then this is a grave crossing of a very serious line, and is utterly intolerable. It cannot be done. It cannot be allowed to stand. if it is true, then I will do all in my power to stop it. We will pull out all the stops, every lawful means of seeing that this child is returned to her parents and that all persons responsible are held accountable to the fullest extent of the law. There can be no freedom of speech, no freedom of association, no freedom to even open your mouth and "speak truth to power," no freedom AT ALL, if your children can be black bagged and stolen from you because of your political speech and associations - because you simply dare to express your love of country, and dare to express your solidarity and fellowship with other citizens and with active duty and retired military and police who simply pledge to honor their oath and obey the Constitution. It was to prevent just such outrageous content based persecution of political dissidents that our First Amendment was written. If true, then this is as bad, and in fact worse, than any of the violations of liberty that our Declaration of Independence lists as the reasons for our forefathers taking up arms in our Revolution and for separating from England. We no longer have freedom at all if this is allowed to be done. And we will not let it stand.

Stewart Rhodes
Founder of Oath Keepers
Yale Law, 04
Army Airborne School, 83
: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: ImpeachBarrySoetoro October 07, 2010, 11:08:18 PM
http://oathkeepers.org/oath/2010/10/07/oath-keepers-statement-about-video-titled-government-agents-seize-oath-keepers-new-born-from-hospital/

Stewart has just now as of 7:45PM PST, spoken to the father and he is faxing documents to Stewart. We are establishing a legal defense fund. Once it is confirmed through documentation that the father’s association with Oath Keepers was listed as a reason, even if among several reasons listed, for taking the child, we will actively pursue aggressive legal remedy and redress. We will assist in locating competent local legal counsel in New Hampshire and additional expert legal counsel from around the country in First Amendment and child custody law. Stewart, who has worked on several First Amendment  cases in State and Federal court will also volunteer his services to assist in the case Pro Bono.
: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: adissenter2 October 07, 2010, 11:11:06 PM
Let me guess, this whole thing may have something to do with a new TIME MAGAZINE article
that totally associates many good people and groups with some serious nut jobs

Locked and Loaded: The Secret World of Extreme Militias Oct. 11, 2010 issue
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,2022516-4,00.html#ixzz113OYB1L5 (http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,2022516-4,00.html#ixzz113OYB1L5)

(http://www.wethepeoplefoundation.org/update/misc2010/TIMEcover-SEP-30-2010-small.jpg)
: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: Dig October 07, 2010, 11:27:36 PM
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?p=2921065#post2921065

Note from Stewart Rhodes:

Here is my statement for now:

We are doing all we can to confirm and document this. But if is IS accurate, and a newborn child was ripped from her mother's arms because the parents were "associated" with Oath Keepers by simply being members of our online ning discussion forum, then this is a grave crossing of a very serious line, and is utterly intolerable. It cannot be done. It cannot be allowed to stand. if it is true, then I will do all in my power to stop it. We will pull out all the stops, every lawful means of seeing that this child is returned to her parents and that all persons responsible are held accountable to the fullest extent of the law. There can be no freedom of speech, no freedom of association, no freedom to even open your mouth and "speak truth to power," no freedom AT ALL, if your children can be black bagged and stolen from you because of your political speech and associations - because you simply dare to express your love of country, and dare to express your solidarity and fellowship with other citizens and with active duty and retired military and police who simply pledge to honor their oath and obey the Constitution. It was to prevent just such outrageous content based persecution of political dissidents that our First Amendment was written. If true, then this is as bad, and in fact worse, than any of the violations of liberty that our Declaration of Independence lists as the reasons for our forefathers taking up arms in our Revolution and for separating from England. We no longer have freedom at all if this is allowed to be done. And we will not let it stand.

Stewart Rhodes
Founder of Oath Keepers
Yale Law, 04
Army Airborne School, 83

http://oathkeepers.org/oath/2010/10/07/oath-keepers-statement-about-video-titled-government-agents-seize-oath-keepers-new-born-from-hospital/

Stewart has just now as of 7:45PM PST, spoken to the father and he is faxing documents to Stewart. We are establishing a legal defense fund. Once it is confirmed through documentation that the father’s association with Oath Keepers was listed as a reason, even if among several reasons listed, for taking the child, we will actively pursue aggressive legal remedy and redress. We will assist in locating competent local legal counsel in New Hampshire and additional expert legal counsel from around the country in First Amendment and child custody law. Stewart, who has worked on several First Amendment  cases in State and Federal court will also volunteer his services to assist in the case Pro Bono.



Thanks for the updates!
: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: jfranko4 October 07, 2010, 11:31:44 PM
It's brilliant how quickly this has spread across the internet, hopefully the exposure will force them to give the baby back without any court proceedings. They wouldn't want this kind of thing getting out.
: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: Dig October 07, 2010, 11:36:25 PM
just an FYI...this thread is getting pinged like crazy since it was first put up. There looks to be an effort to guage responses to what seems like a targeted attack of oath keepers.

WTF is up with Billions being spent to track every single thing anyone who knows how to spell the word "constitution" does?
: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: jfranko4 October 07, 2010, 11:41:02 PM
just an FYI...this thread is getting pinged like crazy since it was first put up. There looks to be an effort to guage responses to what seems like a targeted attack of oath keepers.

this is going viral all over forums, facebook and youtube it could just be a lot of people are hearing about it and it's a pretty emotive topic.
: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: Dig October 07, 2010, 11:41:16 PM
What are Suspicious Activity Reports? SARs exposed!
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=187539.0

More evidence Bush=Soetoro: Pentagon revives Rumsfeld-era domestic spying unit
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=175838.0

Free Speech Killing DISCLOSE ACT Passes House by Invoking "Martial Law Rule"
Critics on both the left and the right say the act will disable grassroots political voices, including Tea Party movement
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=176680.0
: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: ImpeachBarrySoetoro October 07, 2010, 11:48:18 PM
If true, then this is as bad, and in fact worse, than any of the violations of liberty that our Declaration of Independence lists as the reasons for our forefathers taking up arms in our Revolution and for separating from England.  We no longer have freedom at all if this is allowed to be done.   And we will not let it stand.

Stewart Rhodes
Founder of Oath Keepers
: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: Dig October 07, 2010, 11:54:32 PM
this is going viral all over forums, facebook and youtube it could just be a lot of people are hearing about it and it's a pretty emotive topic.

Well whether low level CoIntelPro ops or just curious minds are flocking to this thread...

Everybody should be allowed to get a bit of truth



COULD THIS SCENARIO BE POSSIBLE? DOES THE DYNCORP CHILD SEX SLAVERY RING SNATCH PEOPLE'S CHILDREN AS AN INSTITUTIONALIZED TECHNIQUE OF TERRORIZING THE PUBLIC? DOES THE DYNCORP CHILD SEX SLAVERY RING ASSASSINATE PEOPLE LIKE GEORGIA SENATOR NANCY SCHAFER? DID CPS HAVE A MOTIVE BECUASE SHE EXPOSED THE CPS CHILD SNATCHING RING? No matter what the details are of this case (whether an SPLC/ADL/DHS/Chertoff provocation or a bona fide act of wholesale insanity), everyone needs to understand what Nancy was uncovering...

Report of Georgia Senator Nancy Schaefer on Corruption in Child Protective Services.

http://fightcps.com/2008/02/29/report-of-georgia-senator-nancy-schaefer-on-cps-corruption/

(http://www.legis.state.ga.us/legis/2005_06/senate/images/schaefersc.jpg)
http://www.legis.state.ga.us/legis/2005_06/senate/district50.htm

CPS Warrior Nancy Schaefer Gunned Down

Infowars.com (http://www.infowars.com/cps-warrior-nancy-schaefer-gunned-down/)

March 29, 2010

From the Associated Press (http://www.gpb.org/news/2010/03/29/gbi-schaefer-deaths-likely-murder-suicide):

State investigators say the husband of former state Senator Nancy Schaefer shot his wife before turning the gun on himself. The couple’s bodies were found in their north Georgia home Friday. The Georgia Bureau of Investigation conducted autopsies on the Schaefer’s Saturday—investigators say all evidence points to the deaths as a murder-suicide. The bodies of Nancy and Bruce Schaefer, 73 and 74 years old respectively, were found by their daughter at the couple’s home in Clarkesville. Nancy Schaefer was a two-term state Senator representing Georgia’s 50th district. She lost her seat in 2008. Schaefer was also a candidate for mayor of Atlanta, Georgia lieutenant governor and governor of the state.

The corporate media does not bother to mention that Schaefer exposed the abuses of CPS and the international child sex slavery ring.

Appearing on the Alex Jones Show last May, Schaefer detailed how CPS is involved in child trafficking rings (see video below). After watching Schaefer’s interview with Jones, if you think Schaefer was involved in a suicide pact with her husband, you may also be interested in a famous bridge for sale in Brooklyn.

Nancy Schaefer on Alex Jones: "CPS Criminality"

Part 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pw4xFKIYTzM&feature=player_embedded

Part 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mt7VPpkQ0co&feature=player_embedded

Part 3: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v0qV4JVoKYg&feature=player_embedded

Part 4: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y53U6JlvEhw&feature=player_embedded

Nancy Schaefer exposes the EVIL CPS

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_TcDTJlPWbE&feature=player_embedded

More: http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=105660.0

: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: Freeski October 07, 2010, 11:58:03 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OvZRM-P46rI

The YouTube won't play for me (an error has occurred) but here's the original video description with many alternate sources. This is outrageous!

-----------

Government Agents Seize Oath Keeper's New Born From Hospital
New Hampshire, Wed. Oct. 6th, 2010

Last Night John Irish & Stephanie Janvrin had their new born baby girl taken away by government officials because of their involvement with Oath Keepers, a non violent constitutional organization. According to Irish, The Director of Security and the Head Nurse of the Hospital said "we want the pediatrician to check the baby in the nursery so that you can go home." The baby was wheeled out in the bassinet under the protest of Irish. Irish followed them out and took note of 3-4 men wearing suits with detective badges as well as 3 police officers.

The Division of Family Child Services proceeded to pat down John and inform the parents they would be taking the daughter. "They Stole our Child" says John Irish. An Affidavit was produced that claimed an affiliation with a militia called Oath Keepers. Irish claims Oath Keepers is a non violent organization. John and Stephanie were able to spend a few minutes with their daughter and were forced to leave. A security officer escorted the two out of the hospital.

George Hemminger
george4title(AT)yahoo.com

More Info:

Facebook info

URGENT! ~ OATHKEEPERS ALERT!
Request For Help! Please Read Attached Picture
Then, If you can help. Please contact Watchman Noyes
http://www.facebook.com/kan75
or his group page
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=78211532283
Citizens Against Government Tyranny

http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1821086273
Stephanie Janvrin (the mother)

New Hampshire John Irish (father)
http://americanlibertyriders.ning.com/profile/JohnCIrish?xg_source=activity

http://oathkeepers.org/oath/

Comment From John
Janvrin6228
26 minutes ago 3
This has been flagged as spam hide
This is Johnathon Irish, Brothers and Sisters, thank you for all of your support. janvrin6228@gmail.com is my personal email address if needed. Thank you all again for your support, if so needed I will send you our cell number just email me. I don't know what else to say right now, these bastards stole my daughter and she wasn't even 24 hours old. She was born at 2337 last night. I only have a few pictures of my baby girl, I can't even cry I am so pissed.

Oath Keeper Official Statement
http://oathkeepers.org/oath/2010/10/07/oath-keepers-statement-about-video-titled-government-agents-seize-oath-keepers-new-born-from-hospital/
: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: Dig October 08, 2010, 12:01:16 AM
If true, then this is as bad, and in fact worse, than any of the violations of liberty that our Declaration of Independence lists as the reasons for our forefathers taking up arms in our Revolution and for separating from England.  We no longer have freedom at all if this is allowed to be done.   And we will not let it stand.

Stewart Rhodes
Founder of Oath Keepers

Here is the whole quote you posted earlier and the follow up. I would hate for us to take his statements out of context especially given the obvious provocation involved (even if everything is true...this is obviously an open provocation against those defending the US constitution against the radical, violent, fundamentalist terrorists at CPS):

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?p=2921065#post2921065

Note from Stewart Rhodes:

Here is my statement for now:

We are doing all we can to confirm and document this.
But if is IS accurate, and a newborn child was ripped from her mother's arms because the parents were "associated" with Oath Keepers by simply being members of our online ning discussion forum, then this is a grave crossing of a very serious line, and is utterly intolerable. It cannot be done. It cannot be allowed to stand. if it is true, then I will do all in my power to stop it. We will pull out all the stops, every lawful means of seeing that this child is returned to her parents and that all persons responsible are held accountable to the fullest extent of the law. There can be no freedom of speech, no freedom of association, no freedom to even open your mouth and "speak truth to power," no freedom AT ALL, if your children can be black bagged and stolen from you because of your political speech and associations - because you simply dare to express your love of country, and dare to express your solidarity and fellowship with other citizens and with active duty and retired military and police who simply pledge to honor their oath and obey the Constitution. It was to prevent just such outrageous content based persecution of political dissidents that our First Amendment was written. If true, then this is as bad, and in fact worse, than any of the violations of liberty that our Declaration of Independence lists as the reasons for our forefathers taking up arms in our Revolution and for separating from England. We no longer have freedom at all if this is allowed to be done. And we will not let it stand.

Stewart Rhodes
Founder of Oath Keepers
Yale Law, 04
Army Airborne School, 83

http://oathkeepers.org/oath/2010/10/07/oath-keepers-statement-about-video-titled-government-agents-seize-oath-keepers-new-born-from-hospital/

Stewart has just now as of 7:45PM PST, spoken to the father and he is faxing documents to Stewart. We are establishing a legal defense fund. Once it is confirmed through documentation that the father’s association with Oath Keepers was listed as a reason, even if among several reasons listed, for taking the child, we will actively pursue aggressive legal remedy and redress. We will assist in locating competent local legal counsel in New Hampshire and additional expert legal counsel from around the country in First Amendment and child custody law. Stewart, who has worked on several First Amendment  cases in State and Federal court will also volunteer his services to assist in the case Pro Bono.
: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: ImpeachBarrySoetoro October 08, 2010, 12:04:42 AM
Stewart Rhodes:

The document John Irish sent to us is from the State of New Hampshire Judicial Branch; it is a Juvenile Abuse / Neglect Ex Parte Order with an attached affidavit.

This affidavit has a long list of reasons why the State became involved… one of the reasons: “The Division became aware and confirmed that Mr. Irish associated with a militia known as the, “Oath Keepers,” and had purchased several different types of weapons including a rifle, handgun and taser.”

There are other items listed in the affidavit besides the association with Oath Keepers.

That being said… even though OK is not a militia, since when is it a crime to be involved in a militia?

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=263496&page=9
: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: Dig October 08, 2010, 12:13:32 AM
Secret State Police Report: Ron Paul, Bob Barr, Chuck Baldwin, Libertarians are Terrorists
http://www.infowars.com/doj-urges-citizens-to-report-extremists-handing-out-literature/../secret-state-police-report-ron-paul-bob-barr-chuck-baldwin-libertarians-are-terrorists/

: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: citizenx October 08, 2010, 12:15:17 AM
bumped for updates

Note:  as a father, a former member of the military and a 9/11 truther, I am definitely interested in finding out more about this particular case.  I am sure there are many like me who are anxious to find out the truth about this matter. I've been lurking this thread myself.
: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: ImpeachBarrySoetoro October 08, 2010, 12:23:20 AM
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?p=2921250&posted=1#post2921250

Were any of the other reasons listed anything serious like illegal drug use or past child abuse?

Yes there are some serious allegations, however these are allegations... it does not mean they are true. But even a more fundemental point is that the mere association with OK or any other organization is not valid grounds for taking someones child away. If we allow that to happen people will be afraid to speak. That's called chilling their speech in first amendment law lingo.
: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: jfranko4 October 08, 2010, 12:27:19 AM
People are trying to get this trending on google: "Government Agents Seize Oath Keeper's New Born From Hospital"
: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: ImpeachBarrySoetoro October 08, 2010, 12:28:50 AM
People are trying to get this trending on google: "Government Agents Seize Oath Keeper's New Born From Hospital"

I think that's way too long.
: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: citizenx October 08, 2010, 12:32:54 AM
"Allegations of past druge use", WTF!

Quick, somebody call CPS on the president in that case.

I hope if this is at all true, there were more logical reasons than that.

There should have to be immediate cause to believe a child is in danger or being dangerously neglected.

IF that really is the case, it is horese$hit, too, regardless of the OK thing.
: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: Freeski October 08, 2010, 12:33:54 AM
I can't view the original video or the ronpaul forum link - are they working for anyone else?
: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: ImpeachBarrySoetoro October 08, 2010, 12:34:59 AM
"Allegations of past druge use", WTF!

Quick, somebody call CPS on the president in that case.

I hope if this is at all true, there were more logical reasons than that.

There should have to be immediate cause to believe a child is in danger or being dangerously neglected.

IF that really is the case, it is horese$hit, too, regardless of the OK thing.

Past child abuse, not drug use.
: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: jfranko4 October 08, 2010, 12:35:36 AM
I think that's way too long.

won't google just pick a certain part of that to trend if it does then articles will link from it.
: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: citizenx October 08, 2010, 12:36:19 AM
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?p=2921250&posted=1#post2921250

Were any of the other reasons listed anything serious like illegal drug use or past child abuse?

Freeski, right.

This is what I was referring to.
: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: tritonman October 08, 2010, 12:36:53 AM
What if this is an attempt to discredit militias and oathkeepers ?  Could they have more on the couple ?  Perhaps they threw the oathkeepers part in just to paint us all as home grown terrorists of some sort.  Maybe it will go down like,( see how they defend their own even when(x,y,or z)took place).  Perhaps they knew this would go viral?  I just do not trust anything the powers that be do any longer and feel that they plan some of this stuff out under several layers of deception.  We do know that they are patient and it could just be a step toward a further plan.  I think we need to see the affadavit before going too far.  In other words,Keep your powder dry boys.
: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: Dig October 08, 2010, 12:44:09 AM
What if this is an attemt to discredit militias and oathkeepers ?  Could they have more on the couple ?  Perhaps they threw the oathkeepers part in just to paint us all as home grown terrorists of some sort.  Maybe it will go down like,( see how they defend their own even when(x,y,or z)took place).  Perhaps they knew this would go viral?  I just do not trust anything the powers that be do any longer and feel that they plan some of this stuff out under several layers of deception.  We do know that they are patient and it could just be a step toward a further plan.  I think we need to see the affadavit before going too far.  In other words,Keep your powder dry boys.

That is why no matter what the case, continue exposing the actual facts...

They did put Oath Keepers on an affidavit...WTF does that mean? What does that have to do with anything? And there is a bona fide CPS snatching system in the US overseen by the Bilderberg controllers. And Stewart is 100% measured in his responses (as he has always been). Of course they will try to attach all sorts of crap, but the more they react chaotic like this, the more exposed the fascists are. People are not asleep anymore and their tactics are exposed in light speed.
: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: tritonman October 08, 2010, 12:47:53 AM
I Agree that Stewart seems to be handling it in the correct manner.  These evil fu%$% just make me nervous as they are so damned sleezy.
: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: Freeski October 08, 2010, 12:53:52 AM
Here's an apparent recording of the father's account (maybe this is a clone of the original YouTube - I don't know)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_G0wMHrSKBw

7 min.
: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: ImpeachBarrySoetoro October 08, 2010, 02:21:40 AM
http://oathkeepers.org/oath/2010/10/07/oath-keepers-statement-about-video-titled-government-agents-seize-oath-keepers-new-born-from-hospital/

UPDATE :  10/07/2010 10.53PM PST -- We have confirmed that the affidavit in support of the order to take the child from her parents  states ,along with a long list of other assertions  against both parents, that “The Division became aware and confirmed that Mr. Irish associated with a militia known as the Oath Keepers.”     Yes, there are other, very serious allegations.  Out of respect for the privacy of the parents, we will not publish the affidavit.  We will leave that to Mr. Irish.   But please do remember that allegations do not equal facts -- they are merely allegations (and in my  experience as a criminal defense lawyer in small town Montana I saw many allegations that proved to be false).

But an even more fundamental point is that regardless of the other allegations, it is utterly unconstitutional for government agencies to list Mr. Irish’s association with Oath Keepers in an affidavit in support of a child abuse order to remove his daughter from his custody.    Talk about  chilling speech!   If this is allowed to continue, it will chill the speech of not just Mr. Irish, but all Oath Keepers and it will serve as the camel under the tent for other associations being considered too risky for parents to dare.   Thus, it serves to chill the speech of all of us, in any group we belong to that “officials” may not approve of.   Don’t you dare associate with such and such group, or you could be on “the list” and then child protective services might come take your kids.

Note that there is no allegation that Oath Keepers is a criminal organization or that Mr. Irish, in the context of his association with Oath Keepers, is committing any crime.  We are not advocating or planning imminent violence, which is the established line where free speech ends and criminal behavior begins (See Brandenburg v. Ohio, 395 U.S. 444 (1969), which, as Wikipedia notes, “held that government cannot punish inflammatory speech unless it is directed to inciting and likely to incite imminent lawless action. In particular, it overruled Ohio’s criminal syndicalism statute, because that statute broadly prohibited the mere advocacy of violence.”   We don’t even advocate that the current serving use violence of any kind, let alone imminent violence.  We ask them to merely stand down.

Neither is Oath Keepers a militia, for that matter.   However, EVEN IF WE WERE, that also would not be a valid reason to take someone’s child away.  PRIVATE MILITIAS, JUST LIKE  OTHER VOLUNTARY ASSOCIATIONS, ARE NOT ILLEGAL, and it is not a crime to associate with them.   To the contrary, we have an absolute right, won by the blood of patriots, and protected by our First Amendment, to freely associate with each other as we damn well please so long as we are not advocating or planning  imminent violence or directly harming our children (and no, teaching them “thought crime” like “All men are created equal and are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights,” or that those who swear an oath should keep it, does not count -- at least not yet).   A parent associating with a militia is not  engaged in child endangerment  and is not evidence of child endangerment (despite the shrill screeching of people such as Mark Potock of the SPLC, who desperately wants it to be so).   Just recently a Time Magazine article described how the reporter visited the happy home of a militia member and his family -- and those kids are still at home, where they belong, as is the case with many th0usands of children across this country who have parents who “associate” with private militias and all manner of other non-criminal groups.   You had damn well better defend the rights of those parents to freely associate in their militias and keep their kids while doing so.   You can bet that if you let such an association be listed as grounds for taking children from their parents that it won’t only be militia folks who have their rights violated.   Homeschoolers, evangelical Christians, gun owners, etc. will also be on the hit list.  Just wait.  Remember Pastor Niemöller’s timeless warning:

They came first for the Communists,
and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Communist.

Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Jew.

Then they came for me
and by that time no one was left to speak up.

A modern version might read like this:

They came first for the militia members,
and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a militia member.

Then they came for the three percenters,
and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a three percenter.

Then they came for the Oath Keepers,
and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t an Oath Keeper.

Then they came for me
and by that time no one was left to speak up.

So, defend the right of even the most hardcore militia members to freely associate without that right being chilled and suppressed by means of the threat of taking their kids.

But this particular listing of an association with Oath Keepers as one of the reasons for taking a child from her parents is all the more absurd, taking it to a whole other level of Alice in Wonderland “down is up” and up is down,” when you consider that a significant percentage of the members of Oath Keepers are current serving  police, fire-fighters, and military personnel.  Three of our state chapter presidents are current serving  police officers.   How can “associating”  with such fine men and women who are daily trusted with tremendous power and responsibility constitute  evidence of child endangerment?   How can it be that a New Hampshire police department can consider someone associating with other current serving police officers as evidence of child abuse and endangerment?   Only in the bizzaro world of the SPLC are public servants who commit to simply following the law, keeping their oaths by refusing to violate your rights ,considered “extreme” and “dangerous.”

This is the camel’s nose under the tent.  We need to fight even this one instance of such a violation of the right to associate and to peaceably assemble, and we need to push back against the new world of thought crime that is being relentlessly pushed upon us.   If this listing of mere association with Oath Keepers is allowed to be used in this case to justify, even in part, removing a newborn from the custody of her parents, with nothing else alleged about Oath Keepers except that the father “is associated” with this organization, that will have a sweeping chilling effect on the First Amendment protected rights of freedom of speech, peaceable assembly, association, and petition for redress of grievances for all of us -- and it will only be the beginning.

OK, now it is TIME TO PUSH BACK -- peaceably, of course, using our voices and pens.  Let the officials in question know that you strongly oppose their listing of an association with Oath Keepers as one of the reasons for taking this child.  Let them know you insist that they remove that “reason” from the affidavit and issue a public retraction, and until they do so, they will hear from all of us, and also from our legal counsel.   And we won’t relent until they respect our First Amendment protected rights of free speech and association and cease and desist this chilling of those rights.  Be professional, but firm.   Make them hear you.

Stewart Rhodes
: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: ImpeachBarrySoetoro October 08, 2010, 02:24:11 AM
http://oathkeepers.org/oath/2010/10/07/oath-keepers-statement-about-video-titled-government-agents-seize-oath-keepers-new-born-from-hospital/comment-page-3/#comment-12531

I am going to rack out because my fiancee and I are over exhausted with all of this. If any of you think this is a “scam” or something of the sort watch Alex Jones tomorrow I think he has me on at 12 noon. People will know then, my daughter was stolen the only scam going on here is the one that the State of NH is pulling.
Comment by Johnathon Irish — October 7, 2010 @ 11:10 pm
: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: citizenx October 08, 2010, 02:37:29 AM
Actually, you know, I'm willing to give this guy the benefit of the doubt right now for what it's worth, but I think AJ will probably get to the bottom of this if it is a scam of any sort.  I think we'll know soon enough.

If it's true, this guy has been truly through hell, and he definitely deserves support IMO.

I'm sure wondering what the hell is going on in New Hampshire -- of all places!?
: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: adissenter2 October 08, 2010, 03:34:34 AM
I want to know who gave orders to the so called CPS and police to do this???

who authorized it???  there has to be a public record of a memo saying 'target so and so' because 'this is our reasoning' ... look into NH state statute where the people have a right to know and can look into all public recordings/writings and records unless deemed sensitive/national security

New Hampshire Public Records
The New Hampshire Right to Know Law
http://www.allfreerecords.com/New_Hampshire/public-records.htm (http://www.allfreerecords.com/New_Hampshire/public-records.htm)

CHAPTER 91-A: ACCESS TO GOVERNMENTAL RECORDS AND MEETINGS
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/NHTOC/NHTOC-VI-91-A.htm (http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/NHTOC/NHTOC-VI-91-A.htm)

 this has to be coming from higher up, a type of provocateur tactic of some sort
where they can depend on a response that they can point the finger of blame at

hold these public servants feet to the fire, they have to be held accountable

Not in our backyard!

New Hampshire's Free Staters & all other local liberty groups need to mobilize
and put peaceful pressure on these government kidnappers ASAP!




: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: tritonman October 08, 2010, 08:56:45 AM
http://oathkeepers.org/oath/2010/10/07/oath-keepers-statement-about-video-titled-government-agents-seize-oath-keepers-new-born-from-hospital/comment-page-3/#comment-12531

I am going to rack out because my fiancee and I are over exhausted with all of this. If any of you think this is a “scam” or something of the sort watch Alex Jones tomorrow I think he has me on at 12 noon. People will know then, my daughter was stolen the only scam going on here is the one that the State of NH is pulling.
Comment by Johnathon Irish — October 7, 2010 @ 11:10 pm
Nothing on infowars about him being on the show, we will have to wait and see.  I am definately keeping my eyes on this story.
: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: Freeski October 08, 2010, 09:02:29 AM
Nothing on infowars about him being on the show, we will have to wait and see.  I am definately keeping my eyes on this story.

Story now up on Prisonplanet:

http://www.prisonplanet.com/government-seizes-newborn-baby-over-political-beliefs-of-parents.html
: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: jshowell October 08, 2010, 09:17:31 AM
Where's the free state project?  Shouldn't they all be converging on wherever Johnathan Irish lives to get that baby back to its mama?  If they don't do anything doesn't it just confirm they're all for themselves and not willing to stick themselves out there for someone else?

We don't even know if the guy or his fiance's got a drug, felonies or child abuse history.  What I bet happened is the guy or his fiance has a previous relationship or family member that's issued some sort of restraining order, or they shot their mouths off about how they're going to take down the government because they got guns-I'm guessing it's the guy who the girl had two kids with before that's the problem.   

Oathkeepers should work to exonerate their name and the baby should go back to her mama (as long as the mama isn't doing pcp, crack or heroin, and there's lots of those types of mamas), but wouldn't full disclosure help them out now that they're asking for help?

If I didn't have past problems and all these false allegations came out it would only stop people from helping me out if it came out I held back information.  Is there any reason for Irish to not send out the full affidavit to everyone?
: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: tritonman October 08, 2010, 09:32:48 AM
Story now up on Prisonplanet:

http://www.prisonplanet.com/government-seizes-newborn-baby-over-political-beliefs-of-parents.html
Story yes but still no mention of him being on today's show as claimed above.  Has anyone heard anything concrete on this?
: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: jshowell October 08, 2010, 09:44:09 AM
There's a protest today for anyone close:

PROTEST the State kidnapping of babies
Time   
Friday, October 8 · 3:00pm - 6:00pm
Location   Concord Hospital
Created By   
Tiffany Ann Marler U, Amanda Biondolillo
More Info   http://www.concordhospital.org/about/maps.php

http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=140134156032916&v=wall&story_fbid=140174666028865&notif_t=like#!/event.php?eid=140134156032916


: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: ImpeachBarrySoetoro October 08, 2010, 10:19:11 AM
There's a protest today for anyone close:

PROTEST the State kidnapping of babies
Time   
Friday, October 8 · 3:00pm - 6:00pm
Location   Concord Hospital
Created By   
Tiffany Ann Marler U, Amanda Biondolillo
More Info   http://www.concordhospital.org/about/maps.php

http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=140134156032916&v=wall&story_fbid=140174666028865&notif_t=like#!/event.php?eid=140134156032916




Facebook link doesn't work.
: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: jshowell October 08, 2010, 10:25:30 AM
Facebook link doesn't work.

just search for it when you're in facebook
: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: feeditup October 08, 2010, 10:42:24 AM
This could be a psyop.
: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: ImpeachBarrySoetoro October 08, 2010, 10:44:14 AM
http://archive.seacoastonline.com/2003news/09012003/news/47841.htm

A Winnacunnet High School student was accused of making violent threats against the school and was being held in jail without bail.

Jonathan Irish, 17, of Seabrook, who was to begin his senior year Wednesday, is charged with criminal threatening.

Court records say Irish told another teenager he was "going to bring guns to school, hide them in the woods and bathrooms, and kill anyone he wanted."

According to the arrest warrant, the other teen believed what she was being told and "feared for her life."
: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: donnay October 08, 2010, 10:51:22 AM
Maybe they think he is with the Sons of Liberty Riders (http://americanlibertyriders.ning.com/group/newhampshirelibertyriders/forum/topics/natl-heritage-center-for)...?
: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: ImpeachBarrySoetoro October 08, 2010, 10:56:51 AM
97.There are NO criminal charges, they are charging us with abuse and neglect on a child that wasn’t even 16 hours old!!! This makes NO SENSE!!!

Comment by Johnathon Irish — October 8, 2010 @ 5:41 am
: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: ImpeachBarrySoetoro October 08, 2010, 10:58:00 AM
Send this story - http://www.infowars.com/government-seizes-newborn-baby-over-political-beliefs-of-parents/

to drudge@drudgereport.com
: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: Dig October 08, 2010, 10:59:23 AM
This could be a psyop.

we already covered that, please read from the beginning. thanks
: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: EvadingGrid October 08, 2010, 11:27:00 AM
97.There are NO criminal charges, they are charging us with abuse and neglect on a child that wasn’t even 16 hours old!!! This makes NO SENSE!!!

Comment by Johnathon Irish — October 8, 2010 @ 5:41 am

Rogue, criminal govt.
: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: donnay October 08, 2010, 11:29:07 AM
Rogue, criminal govt.


+1000

 >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:(
: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: ImpeachBarrySoetoro October 08, 2010, 11:58:20 AM
(http://static.infowars.com/2010/10/i/article-images/irishdoc.jpg)
: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: tritonman October 08, 2010, 12:00:26 PM
(http://static.infowars.com/2010/10/i/article-images/irishdoc.jpg)
The problem I see is this has not been verified as to it's authenticity.
: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: Dig October 08, 2010, 12:04:41 PM
The problem I see is this has not been verified as to it's authenticity.

why is the font. the darkness, and the angle different in item 7?
: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: ImpeachBarrySoetoro October 08, 2010, 12:07:25 PM
You really think the infowars team/Stewart Rhodes would have seen the different font and not done some further investigating before posting it? I'm sure there's a logical explanation for the different font.
: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: donnay October 08, 2010, 12:08:18 PM
Interesting they block out the child's name but at the header it says, Re: Cheyenne Irish.

I think number 5 is going to be a damning issue.  The mother has issues with the state with two other children.  So they have her in the system.  *SIGH*
: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: Dig October 08, 2010, 12:15:36 PM
can't someone call and verify that #7 is part of the docket?

Also, this is not an affidavit, this is a motion to change the venue.

Even without #7 and even if it was added to somehow get oathkeepers attached.

How f-ing cold is that document? I mean there is a complete lack of humanity in the way family division just regards a child as some piece of inventory and how a one page document is sufficient to just tag and bag a kid.

I mean shouldn't there be like a phone book sized file of reports for grabbing a human being from their family?

Either this is an obvious "guilt by association" tactic to target OT, a psyops that is backfiring like crazy because now more people are learning how easy it is for the state to snatch kids, a lone wolf using OT to help him with his situation, or something else (like covering all bases).

But the bottom line is that this one page document shows how easy it is for the state to tag and bag 16 hour old babies
: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: adissenter2 October 08, 2010, 01:03:25 PM
rally the troops for a peaceful action already!!!

give us numbers to call to flood the switchboards

where are the activists? where are the protesters? 

PROTEST the State kidnapping of babies!!!
Public Event
Time   
Friday, October 8 · 3:00pm - 6:00pm
Location   Concord Hospital
http://www.concordhospital.org/about/maps.php (http://www.concordhospital.org/about/maps.php)
: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: adissenter2 October 08, 2010, 01:22:49 PM
We join with the Oath Keepers organization in asking people to flood the relevant organizations with calls and emails demanding the release of the baby. Please be polite.

Contact New Hampshire DCWY

Telephone (603) 271-4711
Toll Free Number (800) 852-3345
Fax Number (603) 271-4729

Email found at: http://apps.dhhs.nh.gov/EmailContact/EmailContact.aspx?a=adoption&b=Foster%20Care%20and%20Adoption%20Services
 (http://apps.dhhs.nh.gov/EmailContact/EmailContact.aspx?a=adoption&b=Foster%20Care%20and%20Adoption%20Services)
Contact Concord Hospital

(603) 225-2711

Toll Free Instate: (800) 327-0464

Email found at: https://www.concordhospital.org/contact/feedback.php (https://www.concordhospital.org/contact/feedback.php)
: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: birther truther tenther October 08, 2010, 01:49:38 PM
(http://i52.tinypic.com/5yu7hh.jpg)

This document stinks to high heaven.

I question its authenticity.

Not only is #7 in a different font size, the alignment is off by a few degrees.  The first 6 items are somewhat diagonally due to the paper being put in a copy machine, scanner, or coming out of the printer very slightly at an off angle.  #7 is perfectly straight, as if it was pasted over the document in Paint, Photoshop, GIMP, etc.

The above image I added red lines originating from the left margin to show the alignments.
: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: EvadingGrid October 08, 2010, 01:52:51 PM
For Google Search Terms

http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=188946.0
: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: egypt October 08, 2010, 02:13:11 PM
There is nothing wrong with purchasing and owning weapons.

So.  Make them "prove" child abuse.  Do not speak to the System in any manner, at all.  Do not believe nor react to "anything" they say.  Give your attorney his best shot at defense by saying "nothing."  If they contact for a meeting or any other thing, say to please contact in writing only or write to attorney & provide the attorney's contact info.

Best is not to answer the phone or door at all.  If you pick up phone or talk through the door, they go to their reports and fabricate big stories that are not true through and about the "contact."

All is about persecution to make sure their action in taking the child was warranted.
: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: okay October 08, 2010, 03:01:34 PM
Let me guess, this whole thing may have something to do with a new TIME MAGAZINE article
that totally associates many good people and groups with some serious nut jobs

Locked and Loaded: The Secret World of Extreme Militias Oct. 11, 2010 issue
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,2022516-4,00.html#ixzz113OYB1L5 (http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,2022516-4,00.html#ixzz113OYB1L5)

(http://www.wethepeoplefoundation.org/update/misc2010/TIMEcover-SEP-30-2010-small.jpg)






TIME magazine? Owned by the same cabal that's planning on when to put the last straw on Americas back.
: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: Dig October 08, 2010, 03:18:28 PM





TIME magazine? Owned by the same cabal that's planning on when to put the last straw on Americas back.

Exactly...AOL TIME WARNER is a wholly owned subsidiary of the Bilderberg Group.
: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: Dig October 08, 2010, 03:29:10 PM
SPLC, DHS, Community Officials Team Up to Attack Patriot Groups
http://www.infowars.com/splc-dhs-community-officials-team-up-to-attack-patriot-groups/
Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
October 8, 2010

Stewart Rhodes writes today on the Oath Keepers website that the Southern Poverty Law Center is now officially part of the Department of Homeland Security. Rhodes sources a DHS document, entitled “Countering Violent Extremism Working Group,” that lists Richard Cohen as a member of the DHS created group. Cohen is president and CEO of the Southern Poverty Law Center. In addition to Cohen, a number of law enforcement officials are members of the DHS group, including Austin Chief of Police Art Acevedo.

“What does the working group do? Make recommendations on training and how to use all of the local resources — police, social services, media, NGO’s, you name it – to fight ‘extremism.’ So, now no need to file a FOIA request to discover that SPLC is writing the reports naming constitutionalists as possible terrorists. Now it is in your face and the mask is off,” writes Rhodes.

The document encourages local “partners” and the feds to work together to share “threat-related information… and develop case studies that can be used by local authorities as a learning tool for law enforcement personnel” in order to prevent “ideologically-motivated violent crime (radicalization, violent extremism, etc.),” in short the patriot movement.

In early April of 2009, a document produced by the Department of Homeland Security, “Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment,” characterized patriot political groups that reject “federal authority in favor of state or local authority, or [reject] government authority entirely” as domestic terrorists.

The DHS report followed similar reports issued by the Missouri Information Analysis Center and the Virginia Fusion Center. The MIAC report specifically describes supporters of presidential candidates Ron Paul, Chuck Baldwin, and Bob Barr as “militia” influenced terrorists and instructs the Missouri police to be on the lookout for supporters displaying bumper stickers and other paraphernalia associated with the Constitutional, Campaign for Liberty, and Libertarian parties.

According to the Americans for Legal Immigration PAC, the MIAC documents were heavily influenced by “faulty and politicized research issued by the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) and Anti Defamation League (ADL).” In 2008, law enforcement officers from across Missouri gathered in the town of Arnold to hear from ADL experts on right-wing extremism.

The SPLC and the Anti-Defamation League work hand-in-hand with the Department of Homeland Security to demonize patriot and constitutionalist organizations,” we wrote on April 10, 2010, after the government attempted to frame the Hutaree in Michigan. “SPLC’s Mark Potok appears on corporate media networks almost daily peddling his organization’s hysterical rantings and fairy tales about impending violence and mayhem that will be perpetuated by patriot groups and individuals.”

In 2009, DHS boss Janet Napolitano showered kudos on the ADL during a conference held on April 22 of that year. “In recent years, the Department has placed our employees in your advanced training school to educate us on the tactics used by extremists and terrorists,” Napolitano said.

The ADL is currently involved in brainwashing children in the Austin, Texas, school system under the guise of preventing cyberbullying and guarding against so-called hate speech. “The ADL said schools have a duty to protect students and exercise precautions against cyberbullying that happens on campus through policies, supervision, reporting processes and education,” reports KXAN. “Through the years, the League has been a leading provider of anti-bias education and diversity training programs that help create and sustain inclusive home, school, community and work environments,” the ADL website states.

Both the ADL and the SPLC have manufactured a cottage industry around the bogus threat of the “modern militia movement” and specialize in going after key individuals and leaders of the constitutionalist, Libertarian, and patriot movements.

Alex Jones is a favored target of the ADL-SPLC propaganda and demonization project. A Google search of the ADL website produces dozens of references to the radio talk show host, most related to the Pittsburgh cop killer and admitted white supremacist Richard Poplawski. Poplawski posted comments on the Infowars website.

Other ADL targets include the Oath Keepers and Three Percenters, who are according to the ADL “both part of an anti-government extremist movement that has grown since President Obama took office, promote the idea that the federal government is plotting to take away the rights of American citizens and must be resisted. The two groups are apparently trying to make inroads in the U.S. military,” a distortion that plays right into the DHS “rightwing extremism” document that claims returning veterans pose a violent threat.

In 2009, DHS boss boss Janet Napolitano showered kudos on the ADL during a conference held on April 22, 2009. “In recent years, the Department has placed our employees in your advanced training school to educate us on the tactics used by extremists and terrorists,” Napolitano admitted.

The vicious campaign against the Oath Keepers escalated earlier this week when the CPS in New Hampshire kidnapped the newborn baby of John Irish and Stephanie Janvrin. Authorities said the child was taken in part due to Irish’s association with the patriot group the Oath Keepers. “The Division became aware and confirmed that Mr. Irish associated with a militia known as the Oath Keepers,” confirming the fact that Irish’s political beliefs were the primary reason the child was snatched.

As Stewart Rhodes notes on the Oath Keepers website, the DHS spawned working group details how they plan to utilize local social welfare and mental health agencies to counter “violent extremism” as defined by the government, the SPLC, and the ADL, thus revealing that Irish and Janvrin’s newborn was kidnapped as part of an effort to criminally harass and punish members of the patriot community.
: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: Dig October 08, 2010, 03:31:24 PM
(http://i52.tinypic.com/5yu7hh.jpg)

This document stinks to high heaven.

I question its authenticity.

Not only is #7 in a different font size, the alignment is off by a few degrees.  The first 6 items are somewhat diagonally due to the paper being put in a copy machine, scanner, or coming out of the printer very slightly at an off angle.  #7 is perfectly straight, as if it was pasted over the document in Paint, Photoshop, GIMP, etc.

The above image I added red lines originating from the left margin to show the alignments.

This is accounted for on this article by Paul Joseph Watson:

http://www.infowars.com/government-seizes-newborn-baby-over-political-beliefs-of-parents/

They put 2 pages into one page. In the above link they are separate.

This looks legit guys.

Snatch and grab of a 16 hour old baby by the state where being a member of OT is mentioned as part of the justification.

: mp3 AJ interview with the Oathkeeper's Irish family
: Irobot October 08, 2010, 04:53:16 PM
AJ interview with the family today-
http://www.archive.org/details/irish_family_aj_oct8_10.mp3

: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: birther truther tenther October 08, 2010, 05:38:18 PM
This is accounted for on this article by Paul Joseph Watson:

http://www.infowars.com/government-seizes-newborn-baby-over-political-beliefs-of-parents/

They put 2 pages into one page. In the above link they are separate.

This looks legit guys.

Snatch and grab of a 16 hour old baby by the state where being a member of OT is mentioned as part of the justification.



A Copy and paste job is a good way to raise red flags.

I'm not trying to be a d**k here, but now the new split documents look even more suspect.

The header is way off.

The font for THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE is regular on the first image, and bold in the second.

Then the gap between "Merrimack SS" and CONCORD FAMILY DIVISION gets larger on the second page causing the Docket No. to be off the second page.

The reason why I am being nitpicky about this is because I will get laughed out of the room, if I try to show people this as evidence.

I'm totally ok with redactions for privacy reasons, but what's wrong with a PDF high res scan of the two pages in question?

(http://static.infowars.com/2010/10/i/article-images/cps02.jpg)(http://static.infowars.com/2010/10/i/article-images/cps01.jpg)

: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: admin October 08, 2010, 05:45:04 PM
At first people were claiming it was fake because we tagged the "Oath Keepers" part on to the first document. Now we tried to make it clear that the second part was on a different sheet of paper, some still can't accept it. Please stop the denial - we have the entire affidavit. This is real, we have confirmed the authenticity.

It seems amazing that many people claimed the MIAC report was fake when we released it until Rush Limbaugh and the rest started talking about it and only then did many people accept it was genuine.

Give us some credit please, we don't sit here all day faking documents and making stuff up.

Paul Watson.
: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: admin October 08, 2010, 05:48:29 PM
And yes the couple has had issues with the state before, we never tried to hide this. One of the first things I pointed out in my article was that the mere mention of being associated with Oath Keepers and buying guns as a reason for snatching a newborn baby was the shocking aspect to the whole story.

Some people still can't come to terms with how horrible this is so they attempt to convince themselves that it's either not real or that the authorities really should have stolen the baby and forced it to grow up in an institutionalized government rape center after all.

The time for denial has long passed.
: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: ImpeachBarrySoetoro October 08, 2010, 06:06:12 PM
And yes the couple has had issues with the state before, we never tried to hide this. One of the first things I pointed out in my article was that the mere mention of being associated with Oath Keepers and buying guns as a reason for snatching a newborn baby was the shocking aspect to the whole story.

Some people still can't come to terms with how horrible this is so they attempt to convince themselves that it's either not real or that the authorities really should have stolen the baby and forced it to grow up in an institutionalized government rape center after all.

The time for denial has long passed.

I've been posting all this info on other message boards. It's amazing how many people are in denial or think the CPS has the right to take the kid.

P.S. Watson I sent you a PM check out it and tell me what you think.
: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: birther truther tenther October 08, 2010, 06:19:13 PM
At first people were claiming it was fake because we tagged the "Oath Keepers" part on to the first document. Now we tried to make it clear that the second part was on a different sheet of paper, some still can't accept it. Please stop the denial - we have the entire affidavit. This is real, we have confirmed the authenticity.

It seems amazing that many people claimed the MIAC report was fake when we released it until Rush Limbaugh and the rest started talking about it and only then did many people accept it was genuine.

Give us some credit please, we don't sit here all day faking documents and making stuff up.

Paul Watson.

Hey Paul, I'm not accusing you guys of making stuff up at all.  I totally believe this family is getting harassed for their oath keeper affiliation, because it ties in with so many aspects of the totalitarian agenda we expose everyday.

The only thing I was pointing out was that the embedded images look a little off.  The people I'm trying to wake up would laugh me out of the room if I tried to convince them that this a real court document.

I admit that I questioned MIAC too when it was released, because the margins were way off.  But after google searching terms used like "right-wing extremist" I came up with a dozen other documents that had the same exact 'patriot and anti-globalizationists are terrorists' talking points.  My patriot minded  brother told me when MIAC first came out that it looked homemade to him, and he dismissed it as patriot rumor-mill disinfo along the lines of Linda Thompson's Amtrak FEMA camp hoax video.

Only a day or two later when the MIAC document was admitted to be real from the horse's mouth, then I 100% believed it.  I never suspected you guys of making up MIAC, but at the time, I thought you guys were fed disinfo.

I'm not accusing you or Alex of making this stuff up, I'm just trying to clarify as a fellow truthseeker as to the authenticity, because from time to time, we get fed disinfo.

I like to thank you for coming on here and clarifying this.
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: ImpeachBarrySoetoro October 08, 2010, 06:23:11 PM
BTW Watson it seems most people would come out of denial if the full and complete documents were uploaded. But because of privacy concerns there's no chance of that happening right?
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: jshowell October 08, 2010, 06:23:43 PM
I contacted these local "news" people and they are not interested in covering the story:

WMUR-TV Broadcast Center
100 South Commercial Street
Manchester, NH 03101
...(603) 669-9999
FAX: (603) 641-9005
Need directions?

WMUR-TV Lakes Region Bureau
Inn at Bay Point
Meredith, NH 03253
(603) 669-9999

WMUR-TV Portsmouth Bureau
One Harbour Place
Portsmouth, NH 03801
(603) 669-9999
Need directions?

You can send us news-related pictures at newspics@wmur.com. Total file size of attachments should not exceed 15 MB.

If you have an upcoming event you think should be on our community calendar, click here
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: Freeski October 08, 2010, 06:35:29 PM
Aren't hospitals still private companies in the U.S.?

Just listening now and wondering why they didn't just get up and leave when they started getting bad vibes from the stalling of the hospital staff? Hindsight, I know, but I'm just wondering how differently things might play out in the U.S. vs. a Canadian-style government-owned hospital system. Either way, I know all to well the imapct of taking away someone's baby, and tyranny doesn't get much lower than that, except when they shoot you in the head.
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: Freeski October 08, 2010, 06:50:39 PM
This seems no different than the relationship between the banks and the government. The government tells banks, hospitals and no doubt many other industries what to do and the "businesses" simply comply. I suggest before doing business with any mega industry, you get them to sign your own self-written contract that they (your supplier) will do this and not do this if x,y,x happens.

This is extremely disturbing!
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: ImpeachBarrySoetoro October 08, 2010, 07:03:56 PM
: XNavyNuke;2922552
WMUR is reporting that an FBI K-9 unit was called out to hospital to sniff for bombs during protest.

XNN

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showpost.php?p=2922552&postcount=394
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: independentWV October 08, 2010, 07:04:40 PM
Bomb-Sniffing Dogs Check Hospital During Protest
Demonstrators Protest After DCYF Seizes Newborn
POSTED: 6:14 pm EDT October 8, 2010

CONCORD, N.H. -- FBI bomb-sniffing dogs were at Concord Hospital on Friday after demonstrators gathered to protest a newborn being removed from her mother's care by the state.

The hospital said there was no threat made, but it was taking precautions in part to reassure staff and patients.

http://www.wmur.com/news/25332217/detail.html
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: Freeski October 08, 2010, 07:19:13 PM
Contact New Hampshire Governor Lynch:

(603) 271-2121
email form: http://www4.egov.nh.gov/governor/goveforms/comments.asp

Here's what I sent: (yeah, I'm pissed off)

--------

Governor Lynch, please get off your ass and return Cheyenne Irish to her mother now. All the Oathkeepers care about is the law of the land and it's time for you to stand up for this poor family, and your country. Every minute this goes on is despicable and disgusting! Do your job and protect these people from these fascist monsters.

Steve (from Canada)
Land of the free my ass!
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: ImpeachBarrySoetoro October 08, 2010, 07:27:41 PM
Contact New Hampshire Governor Lynch:

(603) 271-2121
email form: http://www4.egov.nh.gov/governor/goveforms/comments.asp

Here's what I sent: (yeah, I'm pissed off)

--------

Governor Lynch, please get off your ass and return Cheyenne Irish to her mother now. All the Oathkeepers care about is the law of the land and it's time for you to stand up for this poor family, and your country. Every minute this goes on is despicable and disgusting! Do your job and protect these people from these fascist monsters.

Steve (from Canada)
Land of the free my ass!

Sending multiple emails.
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: Freeski October 08, 2010, 07:29:09 PM
Bomb-Sniffing Dogs Check Hospital During Protest
Demonstrators Protest After DCYF Seizes Newborn
POSTED: 6:14 pm EDT October 8, 2010

CONCORD, N.H. -- FBI bomb-sniffing dogs were at Concord Hospital on Friday after demonstrators gathered to protest a newborn being removed from her mother's care by the state.

The hospital said there was no threat made, but it was taking precautions in part to reassure staff and patients.

http://www.wmur.com/news/25332217/detail.html

"The FBI left the hospital without finding anything threatening, and the hospital said it is operating normally."

Normal??? :o
: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: Tokiem October 08, 2010, 08:05:37 PM
I thought this to be an interesting news item you have brought forth on this subject. If this Jonathan Irish, mentioned in the http://archive.seacoastonline.com/2003news/09012003/news/47841.htm, is the same person involved in the CPS controversy, I wonder why no one has pursued this information in further comments. Maybe this couple has been purposely chosen to serve some larger agenda?


http://archive.seacoastonline.com/2003news/09012003/news/47841.htm

A Winnacunnet High School student was accused of making violent threats against the school and was being held in jail without bail.

Jonathan Irish, 17, of Seabrook, who was to begin his senior year Wednesday, is charged with criminal threatening.

Court records say Irish told another teenager he was "going to bring guns to school, hide them in the woods and bathrooms, and kill anyone he wanted."

According to the arrest warrant, the other teen believed what she was being told and "feared for her life."
: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: Freeski October 08, 2010, 08:13:39 PM
I thought this to be an interesting news item you have brought forth on this subject. If this Jonathan Irish, mentioned in the http://archive.seacoastonline.com/2003news/09012003/news/47841.htm, is the same person involved in the CPS controversy, I wonder why no one has pursued this information in further comments. Maybe this couple has been purposely chosen to serve some larger agenda?


Was this guy ever convicted? (i.e., found guilty?) According to the article, he was only accused.
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: Tokiem October 08, 2010, 08:17:59 PM
The more important question, is this the same person?
: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: tritonman October 08, 2010, 08:27:57 PM
Was this guy ever convicted? (i.e., found guilty?) According to the article, he was only accused.
spot on , without a conviction it is worthless.  If you come up with his conviction get back to us tokiem.
: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: Tokiem October 08, 2010, 08:39:29 PM
spot on , without a conviction it is worthless.  If you come up with his conviction get back to us tokiem.

The news article was originally posted by, "ImpeachBarrySoetoro", on page 2.
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=188839.msg1120603#msg1120603
I just thought it an interesting aspect as the overall story begins to come forward.

: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: Freeski October 08, 2010, 08:40:11 PM
The more important question, is this the same person?

I'm not certain but if this article is indeed from 2003, when "he" was 17, I can't see how a 17 year old's alleged imagination or fantasy is applicable here, let alone grounds for kidnapping his newborn baby today, seven years later.
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: tritonman October 08, 2010, 08:42:15 PM
I'm not certain but if this article is indeed from 2003, when "he" was 17, I can't see how a 17 year old's alleged imagination or fantasy is applicable here, let alone grounds for kidnapping his newborn baby today, seven years later.
It is not of course, but we know that people will do all sorts of mental gymnastics to avoid facing that they live in tyranny. 
: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: citizenx October 08, 2010, 08:55:10 PM
The time for denial has long passed.
Truly.  really says it all.
: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: Freeski October 08, 2010, 08:59:21 PM
Truly.  really says it all.

Amen to that.
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: Freeski October 08, 2010, 09:01:51 PM
It is not of course, but we know that people will do all sorts of mental gymnastics to avoid facing that they live in tyranny. 

Denial is way more powerful than I ever imagined. I just recently realized that.
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: tritonman October 08, 2010, 09:08:23 PM
Denial is way more powerful than I ever imagined. I just recently realized that.
Some of the jews no doubt did not even realize it as they walked in to be gassed.  I just know for sure that I am not going to be taking any free train rides.  An Alien spaceship well maybe,  I mean and Alien spaceship would be way cool.
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: Tokiem October 08, 2010, 09:09:59 PM
Who is in denial?
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: tritonman October 08, 2010, 09:12:14 PM
All kinds of folks are,  they want to pretend this is not happening and about to get worse.  Remember first they came for the jews and , well I am sure you know what I am talking about.  I do know however that this is certainly not about a seven year old charge, that I am sure of.
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: Freeski October 08, 2010, 09:20:11 PM
There's talk too that the only stuff they have is from the mother's previous husband. The current father is a fiance, so if the original divorce isn't final, some other alleged dude is the alleged evildoer. Sounds like a gigantic lawsuit opp to me on many grounds (unless the mom or dad beat or raped their hours-old infant in the hospital).
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: TBPauly October 08, 2010, 09:25:56 PM
BE CAREFUL, folks.  The government appears to be looking for a fight...and when they look for a fight, it's best not to give them one.  Beat these people with the letter of the law...since "color of law" is apparently all they have.
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: Freeski October 08, 2010, 09:29:30 PM
BE CAREFUL, folks.  The government appears to be looking for a fight...and when they look for a fight, it's best not to give them one.  Beat these people with the letter of the law...since "color of law" is apparently all they have.

And don't forget the spirit of the law which is the most important of all.
: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: jshowell October 08, 2010, 09:37:51 PM
And yes the couple has had issues with the state before, we never tried to hide this. One of the first things I pointed out in my article was that the mere mention of being associated with Oath Keepers and buying guns as a reason for snatching a newborn baby was the shocking aspect to the whole story.

Some people still can't come to terms with how horrible this is so they attempt to convince themselves that it's either not real or that the authorities really should have stolen the baby and forced it to grow up in an institutionalized government rape center after all.

The time for denial has long passed.

Oathkeepers shouldn't be dragged through this mess, and the error about them being included will probably be corrected.

Unless I'm missing something Mr. Irish failed to complete court ordered end the violence sessions and from what I've heard from other CPS workers that's probably why the child was taken.   He won't get the kid back until he finished the courses he should have finished before the baby was born.  I know it's messed up and should not have happened, but like the bureaucratic Vogons in Douglas Adams novels they wouldn't even lift a finger to save their own grandmothers from the Ravenous Bugblatter Beast of Traal without orders signed in triplicate, sent in, sent back, queried, lost, found, subjected to public inquiry, lost again, and finally buried in soft peat for three months and recycled as firelighters.

it's not funny, but that's the sort of mostly dullards you're dealing with, sure some of them are contemptuous evil, greedy monsters but most of them just hate the world enough to do what they're told.
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: Freeski October 08, 2010, 09:48:37 PM
Whether he attends and completes some social behaviour modification training or not is a moot point. What, that schooling/diploma is supposedly going to turn an unfit father into a fit father? And even assuming there is some sort of an after-diploma psychological assessment to say YES he's fit to have his child, who implements said schooling and assessment? The criminal state?

Point being, is the provenly-corrupt state the authority we should entrust to decide whether or not this mother and father are "entitled" to their baby?
: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: Dig October 08, 2010, 10:00:43 PM
Oathkeepers shouldn't be dragged through this mess,

Oathkeepers should not be dragged into this...psychopathic batshit crazy control freak nazis who are provoking anger and rage are the ones who dragged the Oathkeepers into this.

and the error about them being included will probably be corrected.

And you are basing this outlandish coincidence theory on what exactly?

Unless I'm missing something Mr. Irish failed to complete court ordered end the violence sessions and from what I've heard from other CPS workers that's probably why the child was taken.

Unless I am missing something, the confiscation of a 16 hour old baby from a parent is about the most sadistic and evil crime in the history of mankind. I am pretty sure that "failing to complete a court order" never warrants the theft of a baby from his/her family to be put into a confirmed institutionalized rape/torture/drugging facility which is run by the most evil people in this country. Who else but evil nut cases would be in that field where they have the power to just steal babies right from the hospital with a piece of f-ing paper that includes among other non-crimes...an association with a group of patriots protecting our lawful government from radical and violent international extremists.

He won't get the kid back until he finished the courses he should have finished before the baby was born.

If you do not realize the total insanity of just that one statement, perhaps you have no clue whatsoever what humanity is about.

I know it's messed up and should not have happened,

It did happen, IT IS HAPPENING! THIS IS REALLY GOING ON!

THIS IS NOT A DRILL, THIS IS REAL WORLD!

but like the bureaucratic Vogons in Douglas Adams novels they wouldn't even lift a finger to save their own grandmothers from the Ravenous Bugblatter Beast of Traal without orders signed in triplicate, sent in, sent back, queried, lost, found, subjected to public inquiry, lost again, and finally buried in soft peat for three months and recycled as firelighters.

Douglas Adams?

THIS PERSON'S BABY WAS STOLEN FROM HIM BASED PARTLY BECAUSE HE WAS A MEMBER OF OATHKEEPERS!

DO YOU HAVE ANY IDEA WHAT THIS MEANS?

THE BABY HAS BEEN KIDNAPPED BY SECRET POLICE WITH "BEURO" FRONT PEOPLE TO ISSUE THE NAZI DOCUMENTS!

it's not funny, but that's the sort of mostly dullards you're dealing with, sure some of them are contemptuous evil, greedy monsters but most of them just hate the world enough to do what they're told.

And that is a great coincidence theory about this based on Douglas Adams comical fictional nonsense and "random beaurocracy". These people are destroying this country, the family, and humanity itself. This is the Nazi system of using the children as "State Assets". This is the Rockefeller/Carnegie/Ford/Huxley plan of total dominance over who lives, who dies, who reproduces, who does not.

This is really happening.

You need to listen to the interview with AJ, it will break your heart.
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: jshowell October 08, 2010, 10:01:37 PM
Whether he attends and completes some social behaviour modification training or not is a moot point. What, that schooling/diploma is supposedly going to turn an unfit father into a fit father? And even assuming there is some sort of an after-diploma psychological assessment to say YES he's fit to have his child, who implements said schooling and assessment? The criminal state?

Point being, is the provenly-corrupt state the authority we should entrust to decide whether or not this mother and father are "entitled" to their baby?

Not saying it's right, it's just probably the major justification. Not saying the Patriot Act is right either, or assassinating American citizens is right, but hey we got a criminal government.  From what I can see the only way they're going to get the baby back is to attend those classes, get their parents or other relatives to agree to be guardians of the baby (as Alex jones recommended today ASAP) or pray for a miracle.  

Like everything else run by the government you play by mafia rules.  Sure income taxes might not be legal, but try not paying them.  Sure the family court is a false court, but try bucking their rules and bring another life into this world.  

I've called the local CPS, the hospital and local news stations and NO ONE said they'd entertain my questions.  You can't reason with a bureaucrat, they've cut out reason and compassion from their mind.  The only thing you can do is learn their rules and beat them at their own game.
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: Dig October 08, 2010, 10:04:54 PM
Not saying it's right, it's just probably the major justification. Not saying the Patriot Act is right either, or assassinating American citizens is right, but hey we got a criminal government.  From what I can see the only way they're going to get the baby back is to attend those classes, get their parents or other relatives to agree to be guardians of the baby (as Alex jones recommended today ASAP) or pray for a miracle.  

Like everything else run by the government you play by mafia rules.  Sure income taxes might not be legal, but try not paying them.  Sure the family court is a false court, but try bucking their rules and bring another life into this world.  

I've called the local CPS, the hospital and local news stations and NO ONE said they'd entertain my questions.  You can't reason with a bureaucrat, they've cut out reason and compassion from their mind.  The only thing you can do is learn their rules and beat them at their own game.

THE MAJOR JUSTIFICATION WAS THE FIRST HUSBAND OF THE MOTHER! HE HAS NO RECORD WHATSOEVER OF ANY PRIOR ENDANGERMENT OR ANYTHING! THEY WOULD NOT ALLOW THE BIRTH CERTIFICATE TO HAVE HIS NAME IN THE BEGINNING SO THAT THEY COULD GET A COURT ORDER BASED ON THE FIRST HUSBAND'S LAST NAME.
: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: jshowell October 08, 2010, 10:08:40 PM
Oathkeepers should not be dragged into this...psychopathic batshit crazy control freak nazis who are provoking anger and rage are the ones who dragged the Oathkeepers into this.

And you are basing this outlandish coincidence theory on what exactly?

Unless I am missing something, the confiscation of a 16 hour old baby from a parent is about the most sadistic and evil crime in the history of mankind. I am pretty sure that "failing to complete a court order" never warrants the theft of a baby from his/her family to be put into a confirmed institutionalized rape/torture/drugging facility which is run by the most evil people in this country. Who else but evil nut cases would be in that field where they have the power to just steal babies right from the hospital with a piece of f-ing paper that includes among other non-crimes...an association with a group of patriots protecting our lawful government from radical and violent international extremists.

If you do not realize the total insanity of just that one statement, perhaps you have no clue whatsoever what humanity is about.

It did happen, IT IS HAPPENING! THIS IS REALLY GOING ON!

THIS IS NOT A DRILL, THIS IS REAL WORLD!

Douglas Adams?

THIS PERSON'S BABY WAS STOLEN FROM HIM BASED PARTLY BECAUSE HE WAS A MEMBER OF OATHKEEPERS!

DO YOU HAVE ANY IDEA WHAT THIS MEANS?

THE BABY HAS BEEN KIDNAPPED BY SECRET POLICE WITH "BEURO" FRONT PEOPLE TO ISSUE THE NAZI DOCUMENTS!

And that is a great coincidence theory about this based on Douglas Adams comical fictional nonsense and "random beaurocracy". These people are destroying this country, the family, and humanity itself. This is the Nazi system of using the children as "State Assets". This is the Rockefeller/Carnegie/Ford/Huxley plan of total dominance over who lives, who dies, who reproduces, who does not.

This is really happening.

You need to listen to the interview with AJ, it will break your heart.

Trust me, I know it's wrong for them to snatch the baby.  But what is the only way to make this have a happy ending?  How is that baby going to get back to her parents?  

I have every hope in the world the Oathkeepers will win the case just on the fact they are mentioned in the change of venue deposition, but that's just one point in a long list of allegations.  Are they going to bat for everything else?  

Having a protest led to a bomb sniffing dog being the only local news.  Do you or anyone else have any solutions to give that baby back as soon as possible?  If I'm wrong about the court mandated sessions before the baby was born then let me know.  That's what CPS workers are saying is why the baby was taken.    
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: jshowell October 08, 2010, 10:11:10 PM
THE MAJOR JUSTIFICATION WAS THE FIRST HUSBAND OF THE MOTHER! HE HAS NO RECORD WHATSOEVER OF ANY PRIOR ENDANGERMENT OR ANYTHING! THEY WOULD NOT ALLOW THE BIRTH CERTIFICATE TO HAVE HIS NAME IN THE BEGINNING SO THAT THEY COULD GET A COURT ORDER BASED ON THE FIRST HUSBAND'S LAST NAME.

OH,  that cleared it up, thanks.  I thought it was the fault of the first husband in my post on page 1. 
: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: Dig October 08, 2010, 10:13:15 PM
Trust me, I know it's wrong for them to snatch the baby.  But what is the only way to make this have a happy ending?  How is that baby going to get back to her parents?  

I have every hope in the world the Oathkeepers will win the case just on the fact they are mentioned in the change of venue deposition, but that's just one point in a long list of allegations.  Are they going to bat for everything else?  

Having a protest led to a bomb sniffing dog being the only local news.  Do you or anyone else have any solutions to give that baby back as soon as possible?  If I'm wrong about the court mandated sessions before the baby was born then let me know.  That's what CPS workers are saying is why the baby was taken.    


THERE IS NO "HAPPY ENDING". A BABY WAS STOLEN FROM HER PARENTS LIVE, IN PUBLIC. IT IS LIKE LIVING NEXT TO AUSHWITZ AND BEING COVERED WITH ASHES FROM DEAD BODIES AND SAYING: "HOW CAN WE HAVE A HAPPY ENDING TO THIS?"

PLEASE, LISTEN TO THE INTERVIEW, IT IS ONE OF THE MOST SHOCKING THINGS I HAVE EVER HEARD IN MY LIFE.

MY INFINITE APOLOGIES TO EVERYONE FOR SECOND GUESSING ANYTHING ABOUT THIS STORY BEFORE NOW!

There needs to be a full transcript of this interview and it needs to be posted from sea to shining sea. This is so f**king horrible.
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: Freeski October 08, 2010, 10:27:26 PM
Copy and paste if you don't have words of your own!

Contact New Hampshire Governor Lynch:

(603) 271-2121
email form: http://www4.egov.nh.gov/governor/goveforms/comments.asp

Here's what I sent: (yeah, I'm pissed off)

--------

Governor Lynch, please get off your ass and return Cheyenne Irish to her mother now. All the Oathkeepers care about is the law of the land and it's time for you to stand up for this poor family, and your country. Every minute this goes on is despicable and disgusting! Do your job and protect these people from these fascist monsters.

Steve (from Canada)
Land of the free my ass!
: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: jshowell October 08, 2010, 10:39:46 PM

THERE IS NO "HAPPY ENDING". A BABY WAS STOLEN FROM HER PARENTS LIVE, IN PUBLIC. IT IS LIKE LIVING NEXT TO AUSHWITZ AND BEING COVERED WITH ASHES FROM DEAD BODIES AND SAYING: "HOW CAN WE HAVE A HAPPY ENDING TO THIS?"

PLEASE, LISTEN TO THE INTERVIEW, IT IS ONE OF THE MOST SHOCKING THINGS I HAVE EVER HEARD IN MY LIFE.

MY INFINITE APOLOGIES TO EVERYONE FOR SECOND GUESSING ANYTHING ABOUT THIS STORY BEFORE NOW!

There needs to be a full transcript of this interview and it needs to be posted from sea to shining sea. This is so f**king horrible.

I think it would be a happy ending (at least as happy as possible)  if the baby was given to the parents or their relatives next week.  Not saying it couldn't be better, but all the angry posts won't change reality.  From what I see the parents are going to have a tough time getting their baby back.  Any suggestions?

I did listen to the interview and it is heartbreaking, but I know several lawyers and they've heard everything.  In the interview I didn't hear an explanation for Paragraph 7, where Mr. Irish was ordered to Ending the Violence sessions with Scott Hampton but hasn't shown up.  

The biggest shame is the mother who seems to be very innocent and does not deserve to have her baby taken.  It isn't honest, but like so many other women they're trying to separate the woman from the man, and she might have to disassociate from Mr. Irish to have a quicker return of her baby.  
: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: Freeski October 08, 2010, 10:40:10 PM
Oathkeepers should not be dragged into this...psychopathic batshit crazy control freak nazis who are provoking anger and rage are the ones who dragged the Oathkeepers into this.

Great point! From what I've learned, neither the mom or dad are even actual members. But even if they are/were, so what? Oathkeepers is a principled concept, not some extremist scary thing that's going to blow shit up. It's the government that blows shit up!

http://oathkeepers.org/oath/

-------

1. We will NOT obey orders to disarm the American people.

2. We will NOT obey orders to conduct warrantless searches of the American people

3. We will NOT obey orders to detain American citizens as “unlawful enemy combatants” or to subject them to military tribunal.

4. We will NOT obey orders to impose martial law or a “state of emergency” on a state.

5. We will NOT obey orders to invade and subjugate any state that asserts its sovereignty.

6. We will NOT obey any order to blockade American cities, thus turning them into giant concentration camps.

7. We will NOT obey any order to force American citizens into any form of detention camps under any pretext.

8. We will NOT obey orders to assist or support the use of any foreign troops on U.S. soil against the American people to “keep the peace” or to “maintain control."

9. We will NOT obey any orders to confiscate the property of the American people, including food and other essential supplies.

10.We will NOT obey any orders which infringe on the right of the people to free speech, to peaceably assemble, and to petition their government for a redress of grievances.

OMG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :o
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: citizenx October 08, 2010, 10:53:03 PM
I took an oath once.. before they added that crap about "putting the mission first".  I guess that makes me an "oath keeper" by default, as I still stand by my original oath to defend and uphold the constitution.

This man's child is like my daughter.  It is mine in a way.  If they can do this to a member of Oath Keepers, a peaceful law-abiding organization from what I can see, what is to stop them from going after ex-military in general for their political beliefs.  This is a grave injustice.  It can actually harm a young child to be separated from its mother.  They are quite possibly harming an innocent child because of (or at least in part because of) the political beliefs of one of its parents.

This needs to be corrected ASAP.
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: Freeski October 08, 2010, 11:05:13 PM
I took an oath once.. before they added that crap about "putting the mission first".  I guess that makes me an "oath keeper" by default, as I still stand by my original oath to defend and uphold the constitution.

This man's child is like my daughter.  It is mine in a way.  If they can do this to a member of Oath Keepers, a peaceful law-abiding organization from what I can see, what is to stop them from going after ex-military in general for their political beliefs.  This is a grave injustice.  It can actually harm a young child to be separated from its mother.  They are quite possibly harming an innocent child because of (or at least in part because of) the political beliefs of one of its parents.

This needs to be corrected ASAP.

Correct! The system has also stolen my brother's child and no law, no statute, no opinion, no motion, no bureaucracy, no government can EVER usurp my brother's right to have a life with his daughter. THEY DO NOT OWN US!!!

1. God (your creator)
2. You/Me
3. Everyone else (including the goddamed courts and government)

That's the order!
: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: Dig October 08, 2010, 11:08:09 PM
I think it would be a happy ending (at least as happy as possible)  if the baby was given to the parents or their relatives next week.  Not saying it couldn't be better, but all the angry posts won't change reality.  From what I see the parents are going to have a tough time getting their baby back.  Any suggestions?

I did listen to the interview and it is heartbreaking, but I know several lawyers and they've heard everything.  In the interview I didn't hear an explanation for Paragraph 7, where Mr. Irish was ordered to Ending the Violence sessions with Scott Hampton but hasn't shown up.  

The biggest shame is the mother who seems to be very innocent and does not deserve to have her baby taken.  It isn't honest, but like so many other women they're trying to separate the woman from the man, and she might have to disassociate from Mr. Irish to have a quicker return of her baby.  

Angry posts?

The anger has not come from humans who are upset, the outrage came from someone using a piece of paper to kidnap an infant from their parents in public, in broad daylight, based on association with a group committed to defending the legal government and the constitution.

I mean, I am sure in a Brave New World, we can just take our Soma and engage in some Pagan ritual to deal with this as Huxley/Rockefeller/Carnegie/Ford would like us to. This is a 100% attack on humanity itself. We are being not only dehumanized but we are even being desensitized to our most basic instincts of protecting and loving our own children.

Again, how is this not a clear and present danger to national security when an anti-constitutional and anti-government agency like the Dyncorp / East India Trading Company child kidnapping ring is able to target people because they are committed to protect the government from all enemies to it?
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: adissenter2 October 09, 2010, 02:53:03 AM
so I google news searched for this story and found:

BREAKING TEABAGGER NEWS: Govmint Stoled Newborn Baby
http://wonkette.com/425681/breaking-teabagger-news-govmint-stoled-newborn-baby-from-teabagger-parents (http://wonkette.com/425681/breaking-teabagger-news-govmint-stoled-newborn-baby-from-teabagger-parents)

: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: lamourlady October 09, 2010, 03:25:14 AM

PLEASE, LISTEN TO THE INTERVIEW, IT IS ONE OF THE MOST SHOCKING THINGS I HAVE EVER HEARD IN MY LIFE.

MY INFINITE APOLOGIES TO EVERYONE FOR SECOND GUESSING ANYTHING ABOUT THIS STORY BEFORE NOW!

There needs to be a full transcript of this interview and it needs to be posted from sea to shining sea. This is so f**king horrible.

Can you or someone else link me up for this?  Thanks!
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: adissenter2 October 09, 2010, 04:50:00 AM
the interview starts at the 4:30 mark on the first video

Alex Jones - John Irish & Stephanie Taylor - State thugs, snatch Newborn Over Political Beliefs 1_3!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N2Oz8Ys8hMc (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N2Oz8Ys8hMc)

Alex Jones - John Irish & Stephanie Taylor - State thugs, snatch Newborn Over Political Beliefs 2_3
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ErFt0LzA9I (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ErFt0LzA9I)

Alex Jones - John Irish & Stephanie Taylor - State thugs, snatch Newborn Over Political Beliefs 3_3!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MCJvHdGANXg (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MCJvHdGANXg)
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: lamourlady October 09, 2010, 05:00:48 AM
the interview starts at the 4:30 mark on the first video

Alex Jones - John Irish & Stephanie Taylor - State thugs, snatch Newborn Over Political Beliefs 1_3!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N2Oz8Ys8hMc (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N2Oz8Ys8hMc)

Alex Jones - John Irish & Stephanie Taylor - State thugs, snatch Newborn Over Political Beliefs 2_3
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ErFt0LzA9I (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ErFt0LzA9I)

Alex Jones - John Irish & Stephanie Taylor - State thugs, snatch Newborn Over Political Beliefs 3_3!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MCJvHdGANXg (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MCJvHdGANXg)

Aw, thanks Adissenter!!!
: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: SUPREMEMASTER October 09, 2010, 07:12:15 AM
Stewart Rhodes writes today on the Oath Keepers website that the Southern Poverty Law Center is now officially part of the Department of Homeland Security.

WHAT!?




...Sorry to make such an unproductive post, but UUUGGGGHHHHH
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: donnay October 09, 2010, 09:54:47 AM
Copy and paste if you don't have words of your own!

Contact New Hampshire Governor Lynch:

(603) 271-2121
email form: http://www4.egov.nh.gov/governor/goveforms/comments.asp

Here's what I sent: (yeah, I'm pissed off)

--------

Governor Lynch, please get off your ass and return Cheyenne Irish to her mother now. All the Oathkeepers care about is the law of the land and it's time for you to stand up for this poor family, and your country. Every minute this goes on is despicable and disgusting! Do your job and protect these people from these fascist monsters.

Steve (from Canada)
Land of the free my ass!

This is also a voting year!  Publicity of this will definitely put a damper on his future if he doesn't act, swiftly.  I reminded him of this too!

To contact these people:

Johnathan Irish and Stephine Janvrin
411 Campground Road
Northwood, NH  03621

Janvrin6228@gmail.com
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: JINXT333 October 09, 2010, 10:10:04 AM
We NEED to get this as the #1 Google search.Lets push this all day.We can do this it is within our power to change the outcome of this case thru the information war.This is an election year so we can change this.they are trying to break our will we can not tolerate this latest attack on our liberties but our spirit as well

#1 Google search
Gvrmnt Kidnaps Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents

(If anyone can think of something more clever do it! lets just get this as #1 Google search)
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: Optimus October 09, 2010, 10:14:03 AM
We NEED to get this as the #1 Google search.Lets push this all day.We can do this it is within our power to change the outcome of this case thru the information war.This is an election year so we can change this.they are trying to break our will we can not tolerate this latest attack on our liberties but our spirit as well

#1 Google search
Gvrmnt Kidnaps Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents

(If anyone can think of something more clever do it! lets just get this as #1 Google search)

Search terms
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=188946.0
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: Infoninja October 09, 2010, 10:35:24 AM
Alex has a video up called "CPS kidnaps baby". Let's use that term....
: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: jshowell October 09, 2010, 10:43:08 AM
Angry posts?

The anger has not come from humans who are upset, the outrage came from someone using a piece of paper to kidnap an infant from their parents in public, in broad daylight, based on association with a group committed to defending the legal government and the constitution.

I mean, I am sure in a Brave New World, we can just take our Soma and engage in some Pagan ritual to deal with this as Huxley/Rockefeller/Carnegie/Ford would like us to. This is a 100% attack on humanity itself. We are being not only dehumanized but we are even being desensitized to our most basic instincts of protecting and loving our own children.

Again, how is this not a clear and present danger to national security when an anti-constitutional and anti-government agency like the Dyncorp / East India Trading Company child kidnapping ring is able to target people because they are committed to protect the government from all enemies to it?

Hey, it's a mommy and daddy issue.  Stephanie's old husband won't sign divorce papers and he's one of the parties involved in the problem. :  http://www.examiner.com/human-rights-in-national/concord-hospital-protest-against-baby-kidnap-video
Mother of the baby, Stephanie Janvrin's former partner and legal husband, David Taylor refuses to sign divorce papers and claims that he is the father of the baby according to statements made at the protest.

"He will not accept or sign the papers" for a divorce. "He just will not do it," she said.


Like I said in my post on the second page it's normally the past partner or some other relative that's the problem.  The state reacts to what the perceived legal reality is, and right now on paper Stephanie's still married to a guy who isn't allowed to have kids (according to a court order).

This happens ALL THE TIME in family court.  One of the partners takes out their hurt feelings by hurting their old partner like never signing divorce papers.  So there's thousands of other cases just like this one, only they've included a new parameter, an association with oathkeepers.  Oathkeepers will probably get that removed, but all the other allegations still stand.  

I really hope they have some family member they can trust to have guardian status and have already taken Alex Jones advice, otherwise they're going to have a very tough time getting their baby back.  
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: donnay October 09, 2010, 11:01:32 AM
WND Exclusive LIFE WITH BIG BROTHER
State snatches baby when dad accused of being 'Oath Keeper'
'You could be on 'the list' and then child protective services might come'

Excerpt from the article:

However, the document, first reported by talk-radio host and WND columnist  Roger Hedgecock, went on to suggest worsening economic woes, potential new legislative restrictions on firearms and "the return of military veterans facing significant challenges reintegrating into their communities could lead to the potential emergence of terrorist groups or lone wolf extremists capable of carrying out violent attacks."

The report from DHS' Office of Intelligence and Analysis defined right-wing extremism in the U.S. as "divided into those groups, movements and adherents that are primarily hate-oriented (based on hatred of particular religious, racial or ethnic groups) and those that are mainly anti-government, rejecting federal authority in favor of state or local authority, or rejecting government authority entirely. It may include groups and individuals that are dedicated to a single issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration."


Read it here (http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=213149):
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: JINXT333 October 09, 2010, 01:15:47 PM
PLEASE MAKE THIS #1 GOOGLE SEARCH OVER WEEKEND!

              Government Seizes Newborn
: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: Dig October 09, 2010, 02:01:15 PM
Hey, it's a mommy and daddy issue.  Stephanie's old husband won't sign divorce papers and he's one of the parties involved in the problem. :  http://www.examiner.com/human-rights-in-national/concord-hospital-protest-against-baby-kidnap-video
Mother of the baby, Stephanie Janvrin's former partner and legal husband, David Taylor refuses to sign divorce papers and claims that he is the father of the baby according to statements made at the protest.

"He will not accept or sign the papers" for a divorce. "He just will not do it," she said.


He is the father, the separated husband has nothing to do with it. They did not catch the separated husband at the house. They wrote that the reason the father is not an acceptable guardian is because he is a member of oathkeepers.

That was the only reason.

This is 100% bullshit and exposes that not only are CPS a total national security threat, but the surveillance economy has become so perverted, they create this Nazi state of guilt by assossiation to those committed to defend our government from anti-government, anti-constitutional threats.

SURVEILLANCE ECONOMY EXPOSED
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=186953.0

Like I said in my post on the second page it's normally the past partner or some other relative that's the problem.  The state reacts to what the perceived legal reality is, and right now on paper Stephanie's still married to a guy who isn't allowed to have kids (according to a court order).

The "state" as you say is not the "state" it is a corrupt institution of family pseudo-courts (not part of the constitutional court system) which were created by eugenecists for the purpose of eliminating the power of lower class society. The Eugenics Records Office is on record as creating this mind set. They were founded by Carnegie/Rockefeller/Ford:

**UNCOVERED: Cutting Off the Defective Germ-Plasm in the American Population
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=179303.0

This happens ALL THE TIME in family court.  

Which again was created to force sterilizations in the 1920's as part of the eugenics agenda. This is the agenda which Hitler used to help murder millions of "unfit parasites". What makes you think this anti-government, anti-constitutional faux-court system is any different?

One of the partners takes out their hurt feelings by hurting their old partner like never signing divorce papers.  So there's thousands of other cases just like this one, only they've included a new parameter, an association with oathkeepers.  Oathkeepers will probably get that removed, but all the other allegations still stand.

Once they admit that the inclusion of oathkeepers was wrong then the faux-state, faux-court system is guily of kidnapping, child abuse (removing a 16 hour old baby from its parents is abuse), child endangerment, and maybe 100 other crimes. If thousands of other babies get snatched for Dyncorp this way then people should be aware of what a clear and present danger to national security this eugenics system infiltrating our country is.

I really hope they have some family member they can trust to have guardian status and have already taken Alex Jones advice, otherwise they're going to have a very tough time getting their baby back.  

I really hope the Nazi eugenecists realize hat the previous Nazis were all sold out by the Queen bitches. No one wins in the New World Order, once they complete one step in their insane pyramid, they trash those that helped them. That is exactly what Churchill and Truman under the orders of the royals and banksters did in Dresden. George Orwell and Kurt Vonnegut came out of Dresden and that is what drove them to expose the end games by these eugenecist freaks.

No one has explained why the father cannot have custody of his own child.

No one has explained why the baby was kidnapped at the hospital.

No one has explained why they did not give custody to a family guardian from the beginning even if there was a perceived issue.
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: ImpeachBarrySoetoro October 09, 2010, 04:51:20 PM
Video from protest... The chief of police and director of security for the hospital came to Mr. Irish and said if he stepped on their property he would be arrested for trespassing.  - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lpJUgkIOx5o
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: Sailor October 09, 2010, 04:55:52 PM
I would strongly encourage that all who read this take a moment and contact all the "authorities" in this case. I have done so. It is the constant pressure that will make the difference. For all those who are believers I would also infuse the action with Prayer and fasting. This story like the Gay kid in New York that jumped off the bridge is really getting to me. I am committed and focused. This kid is going back to it's parents. The dehumanization is over. We have gone this far and no more. We have to in a deep way from our hearts say NO MORE >:(    Drudge is something of a let down in this case. Maybe he will link to the World net daily story.    

Contact New Hampshire Governor Lynch:

(603) 271-2121
email form: http://www4.egov.nh.gov/governor/goveforms/comments.asp


Contact New Hampshire DCWY

Telephone (603) 271-4711
Toll Free Number (800) 852-3345
Fax Number (603) 271-4729

Email found at: http://apps.dhhs.nh.gov/EmailContact/EmailContact.aspx?a=adoption&b=Foster%20Care%20and%20Adoption%20Services

Contact Concord Hospital

(603) 225-2711

Toll Free Instate: (800) 327-0464

Email found at: https://www.concordhospital.org/contact/feedback.php
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: ImpeachBarrySoetoro October 09, 2010, 05:01:54 PM
Email this story - http://www.infowars.com/government-seizes-newborn-baby-over-political-beliefs-of-parents/

to drudge@drudgereport.com
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: donnay October 09, 2010, 08:42:32 PM
This is also a voting year!  Publicity of this will definitely put a damper on his future if he doesn't act, swiftly.  I reminded him of this too!

To contact these people:

Johnathan Irish and Stephine Janvrin
411 Campground Road
Northwood, NH  03621

Janvrin6228@gmail.com

Correction on the address:  it is 41 Campground Road
: Grab your mics and join us NOW !!! Re: Gov Seizes Oath Keeper's baby
: Irobot October 09, 2010, 09:07:10 PM
Grab your mics and join us NOW  for the 12160 ROUNDTABLE - Topic Discussion! We will be discussing the issues related to the Government Agents Seizing an (alleged) Oath Keeper's baby ... discussion starts @ 9PM EST over at  http://12160.info/broadcasting ...Hope to see you there!
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: ImpeachBarrySoetoro October 09, 2010, 09:14:56 PM
CONCORD, N.H. -- A New Hampshire couple said their newborn girl was taken from them by the state because of the father's involvement in a national group that's against unrestrained federal authority. The state says he's accused of hitting the mother and abusing her children.

Stephanie Taylor and Johnathan Irish of Epsom, who protested with others outside of Concord Hospital on Friday, say their baby was taken into custody. Taylor says her two sons were removed from her care in 2009 because of abuse by a caretaker.

Irish denies any abuse. He said court paperwork cited his involvement with the Oath Keepers.

Child protection matters are confidential. But Lorraine Bartlett with the Division For Children Youth And Families said a child cannot be removed based on a parent's affiliation with an organization.

http://www.wmur.com/news/25340240/detail.html
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: ImpeachBarrySoetoro October 10, 2010, 12:28:07 AM
John Irish said in an interview last night he and his fiance went "off the grid" to a friends house and were followed by two black pick up trucks, one with a vanity plate of &BOSOX&.

Part about the black pick up trucks is at 16:35 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aq-_SRVTp9Y
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: Freeski October 10, 2010, 12:39:07 AM
WTF is with the hospital security reading a customer the riot act?
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: lamourlady October 10, 2010, 12:46:56 AM
the interview starts at the 4:30 mark on the first video

Alex Jones - John Irish & Stephanie Taylor - State thugs, snatch Newborn Over Political Beliefs 1_3!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N2Oz8Ys8hMc (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N2Oz8Ys8hMc)

Alex Jones - John Irish & Stephanie Taylor - State thugs, snatch Newborn Over Political Beliefs 2_3
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ErFt0LzA9I (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ErFt0LzA9I)

Alex Jones - John Irish & Stephanie Taylor - State thugs, snatch Newborn Over Political Beliefs 3_3!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MCJvHdGANXg (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MCJvHdGANXg)

Bawling as I listen to this young lady.  I have no words.  Poor Alex has to try and console while also spelling out the truth about what has happened.  I know that this has probably happened a thousand times under cover but the fact that this event is public makes it all the more important to not allow it to become a precedent.   I'm spreading these video links to as many as I can.
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: ImpeachBarrySoetoro October 10, 2010, 12:56:55 AM
John Irish said in an interview last night he and his fiance went "off the grid" to a friends house and were followed by two black pick up trucks, one with a vanity plate of &BOSOX&.

Part about the black pick up trucks is at 16:35 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aq-_SRVTp9Y

Does anyone think these trucks could have been feds spying on them?
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: lamourlady October 10, 2010, 01:07:29 AM
Does anyone think these trucks could have been feds spying on them?

Why not?  John Irish said in the interview that there were 6 cop cars, from 3 different towns, waiting for them when they got home in which Alex mentions that they are more than likely being watched.
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: Dig October 10, 2010, 02:30:21 AM
The Dyncorp child sex slavery ring run by the Bilderberger nutcases has always dealt with exposure to their agenda with an iron fist:


COULD THIS SCENARIO BE POSSIBLE? DOES THE DYNCORP CHILD SEX SLAVERY RING SNATCH PEOPLE'S CHILDREN AS AN INSTITUTIONALIZED TECHNIQUE OF TERRORIZING THE PUBLIC? DOES THE DYNCORP CHILD SEX SLAVERY RING ASSASSINATE PEOPLE LIKE GEORGIA SENATOR NANCY SCHAFER? DID CPS HAVE A MOTIVE BECUASE SHE EXPOSED THE CPS CHILD SNATCHING RING? No matter what the details are of this case (whether an SPLC/ADL/DHS/Chertoff provocation or a bona fide act of wholesale insanity), everyone needs to understand what Nancy was uncovering...

Report of Georgia Senator Nancy Schaefer on Corruption in Child Protective Services.

http://fightcps.com/2008/02/29/report-of-georgia-senator-nancy-schaefer-on-cps-corruption/

(http://www.legis.state.ga.us/legis/2005_06/senate/images/schaefersc.jpg)
http://www.legis.state.ga.us/legis/2005_06/senate/district50.htm

CPS Warrior Nancy Schaefer Gunned Down

Infowars.com (http://www.infowars.com/cps-warrior-nancy-schaefer-gunned-down/)

March 29, 2010

From the Associated Press (http://www.gpb.org/news/2010/03/29/gbi-schaefer-deaths-likely-murder-suicide):

State investigators say the husband of former state Senator Nancy Schaefer shot his wife before turning the gun on himself. The couple’s bodies were found in their north Georgia home Friday. The Georgia Bureau of Investigation conducted autopsies on the Schaefer’s Saturday—investigators say all evidence points to the deaths as a murder-suicide. The bodies of Nancy and Bruce Schaefer, 73 and 74 years old respectively, were found by their daughter at the couple’s home in Clarkesville. Nancy Schaefer was a two-term state Senator representing Georgia’s 50th district. She lost her seat in 2008. Schaefer was also a candidate for mayor of Atlanta, Georgia lieutenant governor and governor of the state.

The corporate media does not bother to mention that Schaefer exposed the abuses of CPS and the international child sex slavery ring.

Appearing on the Alex Jones Show last May, Schaefer detailed how CPS is involved in child trafficking rings (see video below). After watching Schaefer’s interview with Jones, if you think Schaefer was involved in a suicide pact with her husband, you may also be interested in a famous bridge for sale in Brooklyn.

Nancy Schaefer on Alex Jones: "CPS Criminality"

Part 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pw4xFKIYTzM&feature=player_embedded

Part 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mt7VPpkQ0co&feature=player_embedded

Part 3: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v0qV4JVoKYg&feature=player_embedded

Part 4: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y53U6JlvEhw&feature=player_embedded

Nancy Schaefer exposes the EVIL CPS

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_TcDTJlPWbE&feature=player_embedded

More: http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=105660.0



What are Suspicious Activity Reports? SARs exposed!
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=187539.0

More evidence Bush=Soetoro: Pentagon revives Rumsfeld-era domestic spying unit
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=175838.0

Free Speech Killing DISCLOSE ACT Passes House by Invoking "Martial Law Rule"
Critics on both the left and the right say the act will disable grassroots political voices, including Tea Party movement
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=176680.0
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: Guns Equal Freedom October 10, 2010, 06:28:20 AM
I honestly don't know what side to believe.
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: Guns Equal Freedom October 10, 2010, 07:01:15 AM
I might not be a genius, but something doesn't add up.

If your wife wants a divorce, and you "refuse to sign the divorce papers", could that possibly mean, "the guy thinks it is his kid that was just born"?

This story gets more interesting everyday.
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: Lisbeth October 10, 2010, 07:26:06 AM
What about her two other children.  I would be fighting to get them back before considering having another child!  I think there are important elements missing from this story.
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: EvadingGrid October 10, 2010, 07:30:53 AM
Search terms
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=188946.0
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: citizenx October 10, 2010, 07:51:54 AM
That his being a member of Oath Keepers was even listed on the order means the whole thing needs to be examined and investigated by the state immediately -- like yesterday!  That's the bottom line.  Whether the other reasons listed are valid is not even really important at the moment.  The governor or whomever needs to officially look into this case to make sure this was not merely politically motivated.  Until the governor's office at least concedes to officially investigate this matter, people need to keep protesting, emailing, calling etc.

This is a gross injustice, and will still be an injustice even after the state returns this child becasue of the precedent this would have set, if for no other reason.

Until such action is taken by the authorities, there is no reason to believe this isn't a politically motivated attack on the civil liberties of this family, Oath Keepers and the people of New Hampshire and America.
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: JINXT333 October 10, 2010, 07:54:36 AM
Agreed there is alot of elements from this case that are suspicious.However,you must take into deep consideration the FACT that these localized foreign terrorist bodies that operate with in the intelligence community and other federal agencies have proven time and time again to be habitual liars, they have consistently used/abused their agencies power to break the will and spirit of our god given freedom they are attempting to destroy everything that we love...our children.That is why this case is so important,it is getting public attention and they are testing our will,I repeat they are testing our will! I cannot stress the importance of this case,it is a very sophisticated psyop they want to see if we are going to ALLOW this to happen.We CANNOT AFFORD to lose momentum on this case so please fellow brothers and sisters do not allow those parasitic maggots in a worms ass to win this battle WE HAVE TO WIN! I rarely comment on the boards I am screen writer that lives in los angeles and I am trying to get some of my associates to get some media attn on it.regardless, if we spread it long enough they WILL CAPITULATE. I PROMISE YOU THAT! This is just a test on us.Please fellow patriots try and get Alex to make this #1 Google search it is a very powerfull tool we have in the information war arsenal and WE MUST use this tool as long as we have it which will not be around for much longer.god bless US and god bless THE CHILDREN OF THE REVOLUTION!
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: Guns Equal Freedom October 10, 2010, 08:01:52 AM
What about her two other children.  I would be fighting to get them back before considering having another child!  I think there are important elements missing from this story.

This is why I always wait for the rest of the story to come out.

Also, George 4 Title has a long history on youtube, pretty interesting stuff, very entertaining, grab some beer and popcorn and look up George 4 Title on youtube.
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: Sailor October 10, 2010, 08:04:39 AM
I might not be a genius, but something doesn't add up.

If your wife wants a divorce, and you "refuse to sign the divorce papers", could that possibly mean, "the guy thinks it is his kid that was just born"?

This story gets more interesting everyday.

My suggestion is that we stay focused on the theft of the baby. Clearly our society is in decline and these people like many have many personal matters that is between them and God.  The third wheel here is the State. The raising of children is proper to the parents. With the exception of horrific abuse this always is the case because of the natural law. The State like in it's attempt to control the weather with Geo engineering (chemtrails) is way out of line here. The matter of the two other children is important. However the planning of the State is pure evil here. Clearly the baby was 16 hours old and the State knew they were stealing the child before hand. The document was written (like the patriot act before 9/11) and dropped just at the right moment. No? The Government claimed the couple harmed this new child in the document. In 16 hours? How so? So these people harmed the new baby in 16 hours and the State found out and acted by writing this document. Yeah ah... ;) no way. The matter of the two other children has nothing to do with the new baby. If someone is guilty in America of breaking into a home they are not banned from ever entering another home because of the past theft. The Government has to prove harm to the new baby. The State can't say these people are icky so take the baby. Bottom line it appears these people were chosen for harassment with first the gun matter and then the theft of the new baby. The State is a bully they only go after people they think are weak and can be pushed around. Perhaps because these people have a lifestyle that makes them look weak they were targeted. I don't know. Maybe they are scum. Maybe they are saints. It doesn't matter really. They have rights! We need to be united in prayer and action for these people. Because an attack on the rights of one American is an attack on my rights and those of all our children.        
The temptation to chant "Jerry Jerry" and turn this into a Jerry springer show should be rejected.
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: Guns Equal Freedom October 10, 2010, 08:05:57 AM
My favorite part about the whole story is, it took a "real news reporter" to basically look at the real document to see that the woman is still married to her husband, and by law they can kick you out of the hospital even if you claim you are the father of the kid.

Married couples only, what does the hospital really know who is who anyway?
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: JINXT333 October 10, 2010, 08:15:17 AM
Exactly I REFUSE to get into a debate about dotted I's and crossed T's of this case. I like many other see right thru the OBVIOUS nature of this act of evil.It is the principal of the matter.The bottom line is people is that they are sending all patriots a message cut and dry.SO PLEASE lets not get caught up in debate and I am by no means asking anyone to throw there critical thinking out the window.But on an instinctive level WE ALL KNOW what this case is REALLY about,and like I said before baby snatching scumbag filth have been proven to be habitual lairs and master manipulators time and time again.
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: citizenx October 10, 2010, 08:32:08 AM
OK, but why take it away from the mother, regardless of who the father was?  And if they didn't consider Irish the father why was his affiliation with OK even relevant?  This all still stinks.

Legally,if she wasn't divorced the "husband" might still be considered the father of the child. In that case Irish had nothing to do with this whatsoever and needn't have been listed on the order at all.

Unless they have given custody to the legal father -- which does not appear to be the case --  they have actually violated his rights, too, whether he cares or not.

This is all rotten and needs to be investigated by he authorities.  Everybody wants to play armchair detective here, but this is a clear injustice and it is not too soon to come to the defense of a helpless newborn and a couple whose newborn son has literally been ripped from its mother's arms in a politically motivated attack on the free speech of its biological father.

This is really no time for Monday-morning quarterbacking IMO.

Here's the email I sent to the Governor:

"Cheyenne Irish has been removed from her parents ostensibly because, in part, her father is a member of Oath Keepers -- a peaceful and law-abiding association.  At the very least, an investigation should take place to make sure this child was was not removed from its parents without legitimate cause.  If it was, Cheyenne should be returned to her parents immediately.  This is a situation which demands your fullest attention as Governor of the state of New Hampshire, a state renowned for its part in the struggle by the original thirteen colonies for independence and freedom. No one's political beliefs should ever be used against them in this kind of tyrannical manner if this was the real rationale for this action.  The whole nation has an interest in this case as a precedent."

And BTW they kicked the mother out too just shortly after allowing authorities to steal her child apparently.  Was she even given needed medical treatment for a woman who had just given birth?

The hospitals' behavior was outrageous as well, but another issue for another day.

One more thing:  we do not have to wait for AJ to start using these search terms: Government Seizes Newborn.  Let's get the ball rolling.

: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: Guns Equal Freedom October 10, 2010, 08:35:44 AM
Exactly I REFUSE to get into a debate about dotted I's and crossed T's of this case. I like many other see right thru the OBVIOUS nature of this act of evil.It is the principal of the matter.The bottom line is people is that they are sending all patriots a message cut and dry.SO PLEASE lets not get caught up in debate and I am by no means asking anyone to throw there critical thinking out the window.But on an instinctive level WE ALL KNOW what this case is REALLY about,and like I said before baby snatching scumbag filth have been proven to be habitual lairs and master manipulators time and time again.

See, the only problem is, what makes The Oathkeepers different from groups like The Neo-Nazis, and The Klu Kux Klan?

They all have a militias with guns, they all practice free speech, but two of them are classified as "hate groups" by The Government, The Neo-Nazis, and The Klu Klux Klan.

And, to play Devil's Advocate, if somebody was trying to show "patriots who is boss", why wouldn't Child Protective Services go after those "patriots groups who practice hate"? And, they would make less people mad too, because people hate hate groups too.

: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: Satyagraha October 10, 2010, 08:37:30 AM
State takes infant, spurs protest
http://www.theunionleader.com/article.aspx?headline=State+takes+infant,+spurs+protest&articleId=3cd6180a-5ce6-4f58-9483-ef5ae2329cbc
By SHAWNE K. WICKHAM
New Hampshire Sunday News Staff
Saturday, Oct. 9, 2010

(http://i612.photobucket.com/albums/tt201/Pilikia_photos/irish.jpg)

A baby girl was taken into state custody at Concord Hospital by child welfare officials on Thursday, just hours after she was born, according to her parents. And now the parents are at the center of an Internet-fueled fire storm over government intervention and parental rights.
In court paperwork, the state alleges the health and safety of the infant, named Cheyenne, was in "imminent danger" if she was left with her parents because of "a lengthy history of domestic violence" between them.

Johnathon Irish, 24, calls the allegations of domestic violence lies.
"They're using their false claims to take my daughter away," he said.

Irish said he and the baby's mother, Stephanie Taylor, have been flooded with messages of support and requests for interviews since an interview he did with a self-described "independent journalist" was posted on the oathkeepers.org website. By 5 p.m. yesterday, the audio recording of that interview had gotten more than 17,000 hits on YouTube and sparked a protest outside Concord Hospital.

Irish and Taylor stood at the hospital entrance yesterday, talking with about a half-dozen supporters who were alerted to their case by media and social media reports. Irish wore a "Don't Tread on Me" hat; both were still wearing their hospital wristbands from the baby's birth.
"It's not coming off until she's home," Taylor, who is 22, said tearfully.

Her baby girl was born shortly before midnight on Wednesday at Concord Hospital. And that's where the infant's parents say they were served the next afternoon with an "abuse and neglect petition" filed by the state Division of Children, Youth and Families.

Taylor said she doesn't know why the agency states in court documents that she twice last year reported to a state social worker that Irish had hurt her and that she feared for her life because he had a gun. "The only time he would put his hands on me was to give me a hug," she said.

In an affidavit supporting its actions, the DCYF also notes Irish's affiliation with Oath Keepers, which it describes as "a militia," and his purchase of "several different types of weapons including a rifle, handgun and Taser."

And that's what has sparked the outrage from Oath Keepers and others who see the case as the government intruding on constitutional rights. On its website, Oath Keepers describes itself as a "non-partisan association of currently serving military, veterans, peace officers, and firefighters who will fulfill the oath we swore to support and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic, so help us God."

There will be a hearing in the case on Thursday in Rochester Family Court. And Irish said he expects the courtroom will be "packed with a bunch of tea partiers."

"This has gone viral overnight," he said.

DCYF asked for the case to be moved from family court in Concord to the family court in Dover, citing that court's familiarity with the family involved.
Their battle with DCYF dates back to January of last year, Taylor said, when the state welfare agency took her other two children, boys who are now 2 and 3, for alleged abuse and neglect.

The boys currently live with a foster family, and Irish said he was told baby Cheyenne will go to live with the same family for now.

DCYF is legally prohibited from discussing child welfare cases. A spokesman for the Department of Health and Human Services said it can't even confirm a child was taken into custody at Concord Hospital. But Concord police Lt. Keith Mitchell confirmed officers from his department were asked by both DCYF and Concord Hospital security to "stand by" during a "custody issue" on Thursday and again yesterday.

"We were there just to keep the peace, to make sure there were no issues between the parties involved," Mitchell said.
Mitchell said there are no criminal charges pending in the case from his department.

Taylor said she is seeking a divorce from her sons' father, who lives in Seabrook. But because she is still married to him, DCYF considers her husband to be the "legal father" of baby Cheyenne, according to the affidavit.

Irish said hospital staff "refused" to put his name on the baby's birth certificate unless Stephanie's husband signed off on it.
When two DCYF social workers on Thursday arrived at the Concord Hospital room where Irish and Taylor were staying with the baby, they were accompanied by four Concord police officers, according to Irish. He says one officer searched him against his will and confiscated his pocketknife and a lighter.

Under such emotional circumstances, Lt. Mitchell said, it would be appropriate for an officer to check to make sure someone involved did not have a weapon and to temporarily confiscate it if one was found.

"The last thing we want is for someone to get hurt," he said.

In its affidavit, DCYF cites "significant mental health and safety concerns" involving "all parents" that remain unaddressed. It also states that a termination of parental rights hearing was held on Sept. 14 in Rochester Family Court involving Taylor's other two children; a decision is pending.

DCYF says Taylor "has failed to recognize the impact of domestic violence in her life and the potential danger it poses to a newborn baby."

And it states that Irish "has not acknowledged any responsibility to date and remains a significant safety risk to an infant in his care."

The agency concluded that "the infant's health and safety is in imminent danger if left in the care of" either Taylor or Irish.

But for Irish and his supporters, the case is about something far different. "I want everyone and anyone to know that ... they're not going to demonize someone just because of their political outlooks on something and because they're a patriot and they're a Second Amendment supporter," Irish said. "That is not a reason to take someone's child, especially a newborn."


He said he'll fight "tooth and nail" for his rights. "I'm not quitting until my daughter's back in my arms ... and even after that I'm not going to quit," he said.

: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: Guns Equal Freedom October 10, 2010, 08:41:20 AM
OK, but why take it away from the mother, regardless of who the father was?  And if they didn't consider Irish the father why was his affiliation with OK even relevant?  This all still stinks.

Legally,if she wasn't divorced the "husband" might still be considered the father of the child. In that case Irish had nothing to do with this whatsoever and needn't have been listed on the order at all.

Unless they have given custody to the legal father -- which does not appear to be the case --  they have actually violated his rights, too, whether he cares or not.

This is all rotten and needs to be investigated by he authorities.  Everybody wants to play armchair detective here, but this is a clear injustice and it is not too soon to come to the defense of a helpless newborn and a couple whose newborn son has literally been ripped from its mother's arms in a politically motivated attack on the free speech of its biological father.

I did not know this, but in some states women are tested for drugs after the pregnancy, maybe even before the pregnancy too.
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: Satyagraha October 10, 2010, 08:42:04 AM
See, the only problem is, what makes The Oathkeepers different from groups like The Neo-Nazis, and The Klu Kux Klan?

They all have a militias with guns, they all practice free speech, but two of them are classified as "hate groups" by The Government, The Neo-Nazis, and The Klu Klux Klan.

And, to play Devil's Advocate, if somebody was trying to show "patriots who is boss", why wouldn't Child Protective Services go after those patriots groups who practice hate? And, they would make less people mad too, because people hate hate groups too.


Oathkeepers is NOT a militia.

http://www.oathkeepers.org

Oath Keepers is a non-partisan association of currently serving military, reserves, National Guard, veterans, Peace Officers, and Fire Fighters who will fulfill the Oath we swore, with the support of like minded citizens who take an Oath to stand with us, to support and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic, so help us God. Our Oath is to the Constitution.


: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: EvadingGrid October 10, 2010, 08:50:38 AM
Oathkeepers is NOT a militia.

Yes, such blinding ignorance is an outright lie.
: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: citizenx October 10, 2010, 08:54:15 AM

There has been no mention of recent drug test anywhere.  Honestly, its like you are grasping at straws to see things from the state's twisted point-of-view.

WTH, guns?
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: Satyagraha October 10, 2010, 09:01:33 AM
Couple: State took our baby
Libertarians turn out for protest

http://www.concordmonitor.com/article/219670/couple-state-took-our-baby

(http://i612.photobucket.com/albums/tt201/Pilikia_photos/irish2.jpg)
Concord Police Sgt. Steven Smagula hands Johnathon Irish a letter from Concord Hospital banning Irish from hospital property except for emergency services while Irish protested at the corner of Langley Parkway and Pleasant Street; Friday, October 8, 2010. Protesters joined Johnathan Irish and Stephanie Janvrin of Northwood outside of Concord Hospital after New Hampshire DCYF took the couple's daughter into custody on Thursday, hours after she was born at Concord Hospital. Irish claims that the state acted because he is a member of the political group "The Oath Keepers." Court records show an ongoing investigation into charges that Irish abused Taylor and her two-year-old child.

By Daniel Barrick / Monitor staff
October 9, 2010

An Epsom couple says state social workers seized their newborn baby hours after her birth because of the father's affiliation with an organization that opposes government tyranny. State officials, however, cited domestic violence and child abuse allegations against the baby's father in taking her into state custody.

The issue turned the parents, Johnathan Irish and Stephanie Taylor, into instant celebrities in the online libertarian community. By mid afternoon, about 20 people who had never met the couple gathered at Concord Hospital to protest what they termed the state's unconstitutional interference in a family matter. None claimed to know anything about government's allegations that Irish had beaten his fiancee or her young children, but they said
they were outraged that the affidavit supporting the taking of his newborn mentioned Irish's association with a group called the Oath Keepers. The group's website describes it as an affiliation of current and former military and law enforcement members who promise to resist totalitarian actions by the government.

Irish said that on Thursday, one day after Taylor gave birth to their daughter, a group of police officers and state social workers took her from them. He said he and Taylor did not know where their daughter had been taken.

"She's either in the nursery there or in a foster home," said Taylor, who was on hand with Irish to greet protesters and grant interviews.

But according to an affidavit provided to Irish by the state Division for Children, Youth and Families, state officials took the child because of Irish's long record of violence and abuse. According to the affidavit, a judge determined that Irish abused Taylor's two other children. She is still married to the father of those children, though Taylor said yesterday that her husband has refused to accept her divorce petition for the past two years.

The affidavit also says that the police in Rochester report a "lengthy history of domestic violence" between Taylor and Irish, and that she accused him of choking and hitting her on more than one occasion. According to the document, Irish failed to complete a domestic violence course as ordered by the state, and that a hearing was held last month to terminate Taylor's parental rights over her two older children.

Taylor "has failed to recognize the impact of domestic violence in her life and the potential danger it poses to a newborn baby," the affidavit reads. "Mr. Irish has not acknowledged any responsibility to date and remains a significant safety risk to an infant in his care. . . . Without the intervention of the court, the infant will be at risk of harm."

Irish, 24, said in an interview yesterday that he had never abused his fiancee or her other children. He said he was unemployed and collected disability because he is blind in his left eye from a childhood accident. He said that Taylor suffers from "stress-induced seizure disorder" and that complications during her pregnancy required him to tend to her almost constantly. He said he has no lawyer, though a hearing in the matter has been scheduled for next week.

The affidavit also states that Irish is "associated with a militia known as the Oath Keepers and had purchased several different types of weapons including a rifle, handgun and Taser."

It's that sentence that riled up Irish and his allies yesterday, who saw it as proof that he was being persecuted for his political beliefs.

"They're saying that is the reason they're taking my daughter," Irish said.

Most of the couple's supporters shared that interpretation - even if they knew nothing about Irish's legal record.

"All I heard was that a baby was kidnapped, literally kidnapped, because the father posted on an online forum," said Ofer Nave, a Manchester man who did not know Irish or Taylor but described himself as active in "pro-liberty" causes. He said he heard about the protest from a friend, who likely heard about it through Facebook.

As for allegations that Irish had abused his fiancee's children, Nave said: "Maybe he's not that great a guy. Maybe he has a record. But just because the government says it's so, I don't believe it. The fact that there are documents about it is meaningless. But what they did is no different if I kidnapped that baby."

State and police officials declined to discuss the matter yesterday, citing privacy concerns.

"It's a juvenile issue, so I can't comment," said Lt. Keith Mitchell of the Concord Police Department.

A spokeswoman for the state Division for Children, Youth and Families said all child protection matters are confidential under New Hampshire statute.

A message on Concord Hospital's voicemail yesterday cited privacy regulations in declining to answer questions about the case.

About two hours into the protest yesterday, two Concord police officers handed Irish and Taylor a letter from the hospital's chief of security telling them that they were not welcome on hospital grounds unless they required emergency services. As the officers walked away, some of the protesters shouted taunts at them.

"Are you proud of what you're doing?" one called out.

Such support extended beyond Concord yesterday. In fact, the couple quickly found themselves a cause celebre on websites such as Global Political Awakening, Militant Libertarian and Truth is Treason.

Infowars.com, a website run by radio host Alex Jones, who focuses on conspiratorial theories behind what he terms the "New World Order," posted an account of Irish and Taylor's story. Within minutes, it attracted dozens of comments from readers offering support for the couple. Jones also interviewed the couple on his show yesterday.

"This is Nazi Germany crap that's what this is," wrote one commenter, Robininthehood. "The camps are coming next if you let this slide."

"What this comes down to is: you will no longer be able to just breed. Once you have the kid, they will take it away," wrote another commenter.

On the Oath Keepers website the group's founder, Stewart Rhodes, issued a statement in support of Irish and Taylor.

"If true, then this is as bad, and in fact worse, than any of the violations of liberty that our Declaration of Independence lists as the reasons for our forefathers taking up arms in our Revolution and for separating from England," Rhodes wrote. "We no longer have freedom at all if this is allowed to be done. And we will not let it stand."

The internet played a big role in rallying support for the couple. A Facebook page dedicated to the couple spurred the 20 or so protesters at the hospital yesterday. Many held signs, and conversational references to the Nazis and Stalin-era Russia were common. Someone brought poster board and markers for sign-making; one man held a sign that read "Infant Political Prisoner."

A woman who only identified herself as Tiffany held a sign that read "I am an Oathkeeper. Are you gonna take my kids too?"

Tiffany said she had joined the group only yesterday morning, after hearing of Irish's story.

"This is supposed to be America, not Nazi Germany," said Tiffany. "You can't have your children stolen."

Amanda Biondolillo, a Concord woman who came with her young daughter, said she didn't think the state should get involved in family issues at all, even if there is reason to suspect abuse.

"The family should be left to resolve it on their own," Biondolillo said. "Or private enterprise - private companies can contact the family and say, 'We heard you were hitting your kids. Can you stop that?' "

Brad Guida, an Epsom man who said he was Irish and Taylor's landlord, said the couple had been model tenants since they began renting from him in February.

"He's a very honorable person who loves his country," Guida said. "And I've watched the state and the police systematically hammer him."

But the vast majority of protesters did not know Irish or Taylor, thought they said they were familiar with similar struggles.

"We've got Nazis in our airports," said David Oliver, an Exeter man. "They're restricting our movement, trying to chill everybody by stealing babies."

(Daniel Barrick can be reached at 369-3322 or dbarrick@cmonitor.com.)
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: Satyagraha October 10, 2010, 09:08:49 AM
Couple Say NH Took Baby, Paperwork Cites Father
http://wbztv.com/wireapnewsnh/Couple.say.state.2.1954819.html

CONCORD, N.H. (AP) ― A New Hampshire couple says their newborn girl was taken from them by the state because of the father's involvement in a national group that's against unrestrained federal authority. The state says he's accused of hitting the mother and abusing her children.

Stephanie Taylor and Johnathan Irish of Epsom, who protested with others outside of Concord Hospital on Friday, say their baby was taken into custody. Taylor says her two sons were removed from her care in 2009 because of abuse by a caretaker.

Irish denies any abuse. He said court paperwork cited his involvement with the Oath Keepers.

Child protection matters are confidential. But Lorraine Bartlett with the Division For Children Youth And Families said a child cannot be removed based on a parent's affiliation with an organization.
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: JINXT333 October 10, 2010, 09:11:17 AM
It never ceases to amaze me how so many people have the ability to rationalize pure and simple evil.Just amazing isn't it? I dont care for all this petty semantic bullshit its so elementary.If the newborn was snatched based on something entirely different then why, WHY IS THERE POLITICAL AFFILIATIONS WITH THE OATHKEEPERS RELEVENT TO THE STATES CASE AGAINST THEM ITS SO OBVIOUS FOR CRYING OUT LOUD!  
: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: Guns Equal Freedom October 10, 2010, 09:17:06 AM
There has been no mention of recent drug test anywhere.  Honestly, its like you are grasping at straws to see things from the state's twisted point-of-view.

WTH, guns?

Nah, that drug test for women after pregnancy wasn't my thought, but I heard it from somebody else though.

The only thing else that I can think of why they would put "associated with Oathkeepers" down is just gives the police officers something to think about when they have to fulfill the state taking custody of the kids.

I'm sorry if I don't always agree with you guys. I mostly do. I just like to keep an open mind is all.


: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: Satyagraha October 10, 2010, 09:24:44 AM
The Kidnapping of Cheyenne Irish (Updated, 10/9)
http://freedominourtime.blogspot.com/2010/10/kidnapping-of-cheyenne-irish.html
FRIDAY, OCTOBER 8, 2010


"Happy birthday. You're property of the State."

This is the message that was given to Cheyenne Irish, the newborn daughter of New Hampshire residents Jonathan Irish and Stephanie Taylor, who was literally stolen from her parents hours after her birth on October 6.

While there are reportedly some "very serious" criminal allegations involved in this matter, the focal point of the case should be this: Among the reasons cited by New Hampshire's child "protection" directorate as supposed justification for the seizure of Cheyenne was the fact that "Mr. Irish associated with a militia known as the, [sic] `Oath Keepers,' and had purchased several different types of weapons including a rifle, handgun and taser."

"Whether or not the charges against Mr. Irish are true, this action is entirely unconstitutional and represents a very dangerous precedent," Oath Keepers founder Stewart Rhodes (http://oathkeepers.org/oath/2010/10/07/oath-keepers-statement-about-video-titled-government-agents-seize-oath-keepers-new-born-from-hospital/), a practicing defense attorney, pointed out to Pro Libertate.  "Using this man's political views and alleged affiliations to define parental suitability in any way is entirely illegitimate, and a direct threat to the rights of parents who are political activists of any kind."

This is hardly the first time law enforcement officials and social workers have cited "political extremism" to justify severe and extra-constitutional sanctions against people who have not been convicted of an actual crime.

Just a few months ago, police in Salem County, Massachusetts arrested an innocent man (http://www.lewrockwell.com/grigg/grigg-w142.html) named Gregory Girard on palpably fraudulent criminal charges because his wife -- acting as a dutiful collectivist drone -- reported that he had developed "extremist" political views.

Those unsanctioned opinions, coupled with legal firearms purchases, led to Girard's arrest and detention as a "danger to the community" -- but he was never formally charged or prosecuted. He was simply taken into Soviet-style administrative detention while the local members of Lavrenti Beria's fraternity -- that is, the county prosecutor and judge -- tried to devise a criminal charge to justify his imprisonment.

After Girard spent four months in jail without a criminal charge,  his case was eventually "dismissed without a finding. (http://freedominourtime.blogspot.com/2010/05/gregory-girard-political-prisoner.html)" He was designated a "ward of the court," compelled to undergo routine psychiatric evaluation and treatment, and notified that he could be arrested and subjected to indefinite detention at any time such action was deemed suitable by his persecutors.

This was done to Girard because he was classified to be what law enforcement organs in the Soviet Union called a "socially dangerous person." This same calculus appears to have been used to justify the government kidnapping of Cheyenne Irish -- a much graver crime, given that it involved not merely the seizure of a man's means of self-defense, but of his newborn child.

Cheyenne "wasn't even 16 hours old when they came in and stole her from us," reports her father Jonathan. The head of security at Concord Hospital "had a nurse come in while Cheyenne was sleeping [who] lied to us that they just wanted to take her to the nursery to see the doctor to be discharged. Even though I said NO to have the doctor come in the room they took her anyway.... I followed [them] out to the nursery because I didn't want my daughter out of my sight, as we were walking out I saw several gentlemen wearing suits with detective badges and my gut just started wrenching."

"They rushed her into the nursery and locked her in," Jonathan continues. "[W]hile I was talking to one of the other nurses the head of security comes up behind me, grabs my arm and starts walking me down the hall saying `you need to keep an open mind, you need to just hear them out' and he just kept repeating himself ignoring my questions as to who `they' were."

How typical of an agent of government aggression to be accusing the victim of "intolerance" even as the crime is in progress. This little touch is a variation on the police tactic of bellowing "Stop resisting!" to a helpless victim at the bottom of a thugswarm.

"When he got me in Stephanie's hospital room and sat me down on the couch the police department and DCYF [Division of Children, Youth and Family services -- that is, the child-snatcher apparat] showed up. Three uniformed patrol officers and 3-4 detectives with 2 DCYF social workers walked in the room.... [One] of the patrolmen asked if he could pat me down. I said NO, not giving my consent.... The officer grabbed my wrist, bent it behind my back and stood me up and proceeded to pat me down anyway."

After seizing a pocketknife and cigarette lighter and asking if Jonathan had "any other weapons" -- officer safety uber alles, you know -- the childnappers "gave us a fabricated affidavit ... telling us they were taking custody of our newborn daughter."

Jonathan was then informed that he would be shadowed, Stasi-style, by a "security officer." When contacted by Pro Libertate at approximately 3:45 MST on October 8, Mr. Irish was being forced to leave the Concord Hospital parking lot pursuant to a "notice" he had been sent by the local police.

"I received a phone call a while ago telling me to go to a website" -- that is, a Facebook page -- "where a group of people had taken it on themselves to organize a protest and rally," Irish recounted to Pro Libertate. "I was then sent a document by the Concord Police that said I wouldn't be allowed to go inside the hospital, or even be in the parking lot, unless it involved a medical emergency, otherwise it would be considered `criminal trespass.'"

Irish refers to Cheyenne's mother, Stephanie Taylor, as his fiancee. The affidavit mentions that the couple had been under DCYF scrutiny "for approximately 21 months ... in a case involving two children of Stephanie Taylor; neglect petitions were filed on January 7, 2009 and a Termination of Parental Rights trial was recently concluded as to these two children...."

For reasons not specified in the document, Irish was "ordered to attend Ending the Violence with Scott Hampton; however, to date, has not completed this program." (Remember this point; we'll return to it anon.) The police complain that they have "responded to multiple calls" involving Irish and firearms, which resulted in "a pending charge for possession of a concealed weapon without a permit." It was in the context of that trivial paperwork matter that the affidavit mentioned Irish's "association" with the Oath Keepers, which was misrepresented in the affidavit as a "militia."

The Oath Keepers is an organization of current and retired law enforcement and military personnel who have pledged not to carry out patently unconstitutional orders. The group's founder, Stewart Rhodes, emphasizes that it encourages lawful, peaceful non-cooperation, rather than armed insurrection, as a way of interposing against the all-encompassing criminal assault by the Regime against individual rights.

Had an Oath Keeper been present at Concord Hospital on October 6, he would have refused to be party to the criminal abduction of Cheyenne Irish.

The "association" referred to in that document consists of occasional involvement by Irish and his fiancee in an on-line discussion group involving the Oath Keepers. Mentioning this tenuous connection served the immediate interests of the child abduction bureaucracy, since it created a caricature of the father as a potentially dangerous "extremist." But it also serves the long-term interest of the Homeland Security bureaucracy by using Jonathan Irish as an indispensable defendant in a potentially precedent-setting case.

"I know practically nothing about Jonathan Irish," Stewart Rhodes of the Oath Keepers told Pro Libertate. "Whatever we learn about his problems, the real question is this: Why was such prominent mention made of his political beliefs and supposed affiliations?"

If Mr. Irish is a legitimate criminal suspect -- as opposed to a troubled parent who is considered a political criminal -- why wasn't he taken into custody? Why was  he left relatively free, while his newborn daughter was wrenched from her mother and father through deliberate deception and the threat of lethal force?

The Oath Keepers have been targeted by the so-called Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), an immensely profitable leftist "watchdog" group run by the degenerate fraud named Morris Dees. Through an illicit relationship with law enforcement agencies, both federal and local, the SPLC has become deeply involved in an effort to indoctrinate police (as well as educators and social workers) regarding the ubiquitous menace of "anti-government extremism." Rhodes points out that the SPLC, a nominally private group that is unaccountable to the public, is a member of the "Homeland Security Advisory Council" (HSAC) which published a report on domestic "radicalization" and "extremism" last Spring (http://www.scribd.com/doc/38939569/Hsac-Cve-Working-Group-Recommendations).

(More) (http://freedominourtime.blogspot.com/2010/10/kidnapping-of-cheyenne-irish.html)


: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: citizenx October 10, 2010, 09:32:23 AM
Nah, that drug test for women after pregnancy wasn't my thought, but I heard it from somebody else though.

The only thing else that I can think of why they would put "associated with Oathkeepers" down is just gives the police officers something to think about when they have to fulfill the state taking custody of the kids.

I'm sorry if I don't always agree with you guys. I mostly do. I just like to keep an open mind is all.
I know, guns.  That's why I used an "H" instead of an "F" in "WTH".

But, listen if that was the case why was it listed on the change of venue order too?

It really does seem as if you are bending over backwards to rationalize/justify this egregious injustice.

I'm a parent, and a vocal truther/anti-globalist as you can see.  This could be my kid from what I can see.

I take this extremely seriously, as do the Oath Keepers, apparently.  Thank God.



BTW,

I'm ex-military.  I can totally identify with the goals and aims of this organization even if I am not (yet) a member.

It does not appear to be anything like a militia.  That claim is utter horse$hit from what I can see.

Oh, and one more thing, Guns_equal_freedom --

They will take my child FROM MY COLD DEAD HANDS.

Fu#% these aholes.

Enough is enough.
: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: Guns Equal Freedom October 10, 2010, 09:41:37 AM
I think we all can agree upon that they took the kid from the mother way too soon, at least give the mother a day or two to see what was living inside her for nine months before the court felt it had to do something about the kid.

That right there I think was wrong.

: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: citizenx October 10, 2010, 09:48:42 AM
OK, Well, good.  I think any reasonable person could see a definite rush to judgment here -- Waco-style.

"What about the children!"

Exactly, nothing was going to happen to that kid one more day in the hospital.  Did they even determine medically it didn't need to be hospitalized further and could safely be given to a foster family so soon?  this case raises so many questions and red flags?

I'll bet they broke about a hundred laws and a hundred of their own regulations.

It will all come out in the wash.

Again, this thing stinks.
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: JINXT333 October 10, 2010, 10:18:27 AM
citizenx AMEN BROTHER! I am so pissed off at the bs and doubletalk it makes me sick to my stomach that some people find an excuse to rationalize the crimes of illuminati secret police (hell lets call it out for what it is) I know im venting and ranting but ladies and gentlemen this case is so important not only legally but a deeply spiritual level. I truly believe in my gut,my most primal instinct tells me and others that this is a highly sophisticated psyop designed to break the will of the patriot movement,a test if you will to analyze how free humanity will respond to this tyranny and evil.But in the end all of what I have said really doesnt matter the most important is this innocent child being safely returned to the mother.I know this can be averted,I truly believe if we all pull together we can help this mother have her child returned.my thoughts and prayers go out to the family.BUT LET US REMIND OURSELVES THAT IF WE DO NOT STAND TOGETHER WE HANG SEPARATELY
WE WILL DEFEAT THEM!!!
NWO YOU WILL FAIL!!!
YOU WILL FAIL!!!
YOU WILL FAIL!!!

#1 GOOGLE SEARCH
Government Seizes Newborn
: Re: Oathkeepers Statement on possible gov abduction of child based on association
: jshowell October 10, 2010, 10:58:07 AM

He is the father, the separated husband has nothing to do with it. They did not catch the separated husband at the house. They wrote that the reason the father is not an acceptable guardian is because he is a member of oathkeepers.

That was the only reason.

This is 100% bullshit and exposes that not only are CPS a total national security threat, but the surveillance economy has become so perverted, they create this Nazi state of guilt by assossiation to those committed to defend our government from anti-government, anti-constitutional threats.

SURVEILLANCE ECONOMY EXPOSED
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=186953.0

The "state" as you say is not the "state" it is a corrupt institution of family pseudo-courts (not part of the constitutional court system) which were created by eugenecists for the purpose of eliminating the power of lower class society. The Eugenics Records Office is on record as creating this mind set. They were founded by Carnegie/Rockefeller/Ford:

**UNCOVERED: Cutting Off the Defective Germ-Plasm in the American Population
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=179303.0

Which again was created to force sterilizations in the 1920's as part of the eugenics agenda. This is the agenda which Hitler used to help murder millions of "unfit parasites". What makes you think this anti-government, anti-constitutional faux-court system is any different?

Once they admit that the inclusion of oathkeepers was wrong then the faux-state, faux-court system is guily of kidnapping, child abuse (removing a 16 hour old baby from its parents is abuse), child endangerment, and maybe 100 other crimes. If thousands of other babies get snatched for Dyncorp this way then people should be aware of what a clear and present danger to national security this eugenics system infiltrating our country is.

I really hope the Nazi eugenecists realize hat the previous Nazis were all sold out by the Queen bitches. No one wins in the New World Order, once they complete one step in their insane pyramid, they trash those that helped them. That is exactly what Churchill and Truman under the orders of the royals and banksters did in Dresden. George Orwell and Kurt Vonnegut came out of Dresden and that is what drove them to expose the end games by these eugenecist freaks.

No one has explained why the father cannot have custody of his own child.

No one has explained why the baby was kidnapped at the hospital.

No one has explained why they did not give custody to a family guardian from the beginning even if there was a perceived issue.

Maybe this will be the test case to reverse decades of abuse by the family court and cut through all the bureaucratic red tape, but I don't think taking this case to the supreme court will get the baby back to the parents any sooner.  

If I was John and Stephanie I would have found any trusted relative to claim guardianship of the baby.  I haven't heard any mention of that in any of their communications.  If they don't do that then I predict the baby will most likely become a ward of the state.  If my baby was kidnapped by the state I would forego all the grandstanding BS and just try to get my baby back in a legal way.  First a paternity lawsuit by John Irish (you can get paternity kits online from sites like this:  https://www.gtldna.net/paternitytest.html?src=google&gclid=CKXp35zHyKQCFQY65QodJScAjA)

Once the baby's back and they're all safe then I'd fight against the state.  They have no cards to play if their baby is still in the kidnappers hands.      
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: jshowell October 10, 2010, 11:28:22 AM
I haven't seen these two stories posted yet:  
http://www.nhinsider.com/richard-olson-jr/2010/10/9/dcyf-rightfully-deserves-our-suspicions.html

Thursday, October 7, 2010, The New Hampshire Division of Children, Youth and Families  went to Concord Hospital and took custody of a newborn baby girl not even 24 hours after its birth.  The parents were not afforded the opportunity to be heard by a judge, consult a with a lawyer or confront any evidence against them.  As with many other cases, the DCYF makes a bunch of assertions in an affidavit, and  a judge signs an order ex parte.  

Shawn Wickham reports in the Union Leader's Saturday Edition, details of  an abuse and neglect petition filed by division officials.  the affidavit supporting the petition alleges "significant mental health and safety concerns" involving "all parents" that remain unaddressed;"  a pending parental rights termination action pending a decision;  (Stephanie)Taylor's  "failure to recognize the impact of domestic violence in her life and the potential danger it poses to a newborn baby; "That,  (Johnathon) Irish "has not acknowledged any responsibility and is a significant safety risk to an infant in his care;" and that, "the infant's health and safety is in imminent danger if left in the care of" either Taylor or Irish..."

It all sounds very bad.  And without fail, the usual cadre of ignorant social apologists weighed in, in the reader comment section following the Union Leader story attacking and passing judgment on both Taylor and Irish as bad parents. Fortunately, there were far more people who expressed mistrust and  suspicion of DCYF and rightfully so.  The Child Protection Act has emerged as little more than a Star Chamber and the fact is there are many cases like this in New Hampshire that are not in the public eye.

http://www.theunionleader.com/article.aspx?headline=State+takes+infant,+spurs+protest&articleId=3cd6180a-5ce6-4f58-9483-ef5ae2329cbc

Their battle with DCYF dates back to January of last year, Taylor said, when the state welfare agency took her other two children, boys who are now 2 and 3, for alleged abuse and neglect.

The boys currently live with a foster family, and Irish said he was told baby Cheyenne will go to live with the same family for now.

*************************

Looks like they've had it rough since at least January, I wonder what sparked the first removal of their children.  From the court documents it appears John Irish was supposed to go to End the violence sessions after the two children were taken which he never attended.  I'm guessing he was targeted as the son of a prominent bike gang leader in the area-Sons of Liberty Riders. I'm trying to find the actual court documents about David Taylor but nothing's coming up.  
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: Dig October 10, 2010, 11:47:52 AM
I honestly don't know what side to believe.

There is no "side" to "believe".

The Dyncorp operatives came in and snatched a 16 hour old baby from its parents. Where is there any side?

I might not be a genius, but something doesn't add up.

Yes, after over 20 explanations on every miniscule detail of this issue, your blatant "confusion" into what it means for a corporation like Dyncorp to have the power to snatch a 16 hour old baby from its parents does not add up.

If your wife wants a divorce, and you "refuse to sign the divorce papers", could that possibly mean, "the guy thinks it is his kid that was just born"?

Well then he probably should seek some kind of test to find out. What the hell does that have to do with the Dyncorp child slavery institute having the power to mislead judges with fraudulent claims in order to rip babies out of their mother and father's arms and then demonize the parents based on a bunch of bullshit?

This story gets more interesting everyday.

The denials get more absurd every hour.

What about her two other children.

What about them, they are not his child.

I would be fighting to get them back before considering having another child!

What does that have to do with Dyncorp coming over and ripping a child out of the mother and father's arms? Does your personal belief about your ability to control the activity in your organs mean that the Dyncorp paid off operatives have the right to just rip out babies from hospitals like it was their own child slavery factory?

I think there are important elements missing from this story.

Yes, we are missing the payoffs by Dyncorp, the assassinations of the whistle blowers, the IBM analytics that does comprehensive searches on all pregnant mothers to find out which babies are "ripe" for the Dyncorp farm workers. We are missing so, so, so very much.

This is why I always wait for the rest of the story to come out.

Go ahead and wait, we have heard the interview and seen the documents. A baby was ripped out of its parents arms, that is very clear. It was done by using Oath Keepers as an excuse to do it, that is doubly clear. Every second that Dyncorp forces the state to stop justice is another second that millions wake up to WTF the East India Trading Company child slavery aparatus is and what a clear and present danger it represents to national security.

My favorite part about the whole story is, it took a "real news reporter" to basically look at the real document to see that the woman is still married to her husband, and by law they can kick you out of the hospital even if you claim you are the father of the kid.

My least favorite part about the story is the continued denial by the willfully ignorant to think that being separated means you have to allow Dyncorp to rip babies out of your arms at 16 hours into their life. The fake Dyncorp psuedo directive (hardly law) of snatching babies for not obeying a Nazi directive should raise millions more eyebalss. Especially the tens of millions of parents whose divorces are not finalized and now realize they have a mark on them open to Dyncorp for baby snatching.

Married couples only, what does the hospital really know who is who anyway?

You are saying that a hospital has no way to check the parental nature of the baby? You are also saying that the hospital should contact Dyncorp if a person is a member of Oath Keepers who is claiming to be the father? You are also interjecting shit that was not in the affidavit. In other words, you are now using 6 degrees of speculation to give Dyncorp Nazis the power to steal more babies from their parents. WTF dude, are you for real?

See, the only problem is, what makes The Oathkeepers different from groups like The Neo-Nazis, and The Klu Kux Klan?

Other than every single solitary thing, I guess you have a point.

The Neo Nazis and the KKK have a foundation in racial segregation and using covert and violent means to push their agenda onto the people. Also they are both controlled by the FBI to help provoke a civil war for the Queen Bitches. This is on record for decades exposed by the Church commission to investigate CoIntelPro. The KKK specifically as run by the FBI. The FBI agents were the ones that lynched random black men, shot civil rights leaders, and bombed chirches. This is on record. The Neo Nazis are for the most part a group that is controlled by ADL, SPLC, and the FBI. Watch American History X for a little bit of edumacation.

The Oath Keepers are an open group of law enforcement and military who refuse to follow illegal orders against the people they have taken an oath to protect. If you have never read the oath an oath taker takes, you probably should. It would make anyone proud to be an American. It basically limits the ability for an outside usurper to turn the military and our law enforcement against us. They also include all races, nationalities, religions.

They all have a militias with guns,

Oath Keepers is not a militia (not that there is anything wrong with the second amendment, it is just not what oath keepers is). Perhaps you would be wise to do a moderate amount of research before spewing such blatant nonsensical statements.

they all practice free speech,

That is a lie, the neo-nazis and KKK are controlled by the FBI. They are not allowed to practice free speech at all.

but two of them are classified as "hate groups" by The Government, The Neo-Nazis, and The Klu Klux Klan.

That is because they were set up by the FBI to be hate groups. That is their purpose. Have you even read the Church commission reports on CoIntelPro?

And, to play Devil's Advocate, if somebody was trying to show "patriots who is boss", why wouldn't Child Protective Services go after those "patriots groups who practice hate"? And, they would make less people mad too, because people hate hate groups too.

Your supposition is false, your argument is false, your evidence is non-existent, your logical reasoning contains no logic...can you guess how much truth your conclusion has?

Saying Oath Keepers is a hate group is like saying Mars is a banana.
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: Sailor October 10, 2010, 05:32:55 PM
Can we focus here and work to help our fellow Americans that are humans with rights and dignity that had a child stolen from them. Stop debating over the small details! This serves only the pride of the keyboard "patriots" that waste all the energy they have fighting with each other.
 
Email these to drudge
http://www.concordmonitor.com/article/219670/couple-state-took-our-baby

http://www.wmur.com/news/25340240/detail.html

http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=213149

We need to make this a national news story come on people lets save this baby!
drudge@drudgereport.com 
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: citizenx October 10, 2010, 05:42:07 PM
What the newbie said.^

Here, here.
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: ImpeachBarrySoetoro October 10, 2010, 05:57:23 PM
Can we focus here and work to help our fellow Americans that are humans with rights and dignity that had a child stolen from them. Stop debating over the small details! This serves only the pride of the keyboard "patriots" that waste all the energy they have fighting with each other.
 
Email these to drudge
http://www.concordmonitor.com/article/219670/couple-state-took-our-baby

http://www.wmur.com/news/25340240/detail.html

http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=213149

We need to make this a national news story come on people lets save this baby!
drudge@drudgereport.com 

Multiple emails sent.
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: jshowell October 10, 2010, 06:53:59 PM
Nationwide Protest of the Dept of Human and Child services

Time   
Friday, November 5 · 4:00pm - 6:00pm
Location   Human and child services everywhere
Created By   
Tiffany Ann Marler U, T Ann Marley
More Info   
http://oathkeepers.org/oath/2010/10/07/oath-keepers-statement-about-video-titled-government-agents-seize-oath-keepers-new-born-from-hospital/


Lets peacefully show the Dept of human and child services that we have the right to freely associate and it is not ok to list group affiliation as a reason to take a child!!!!
They came first for the militia members,
...and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a militia member.

Then they came for the three percenters,
and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a three percenter.
...
Then they came for the Oath Keepers,
and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t an Oath Keeper.

Then they came for me
and by that time no one was left to speak up.

So, defend the right of even the most hardcore militia members to freely associate without that right being chilled and suppressed by means of the threat of taking their kids." Statement from the oath Keepers and I totally agree. Who will it be next? because we choose to freely associate with Free staters, or our local garden club? See More
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: citizenx October 10, 2010, 07:13:59 PM
Again though, there is the conflation of OK with militias -- I think we need to avoid that unnecessary association here.

Some of the militas and their members are agents provocateurs of the state -- their rights and liberties are not being infringed.  Some of them are doing the infringing.
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: Nailer October 10, 2010, 08:42:53 PM
This action by the Government openly shows the use of  Gestapo tactics to illegally  remove children from thier parents.

The Movie 1984 has became a reality.

Big Brother comes in and takes your children for no valid reason /trumped up charges.

Oath keepers  is NOT a Militia.

Do you want to live as slaves /subjects the rest of your lives or  Be Free to speak Freely .
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: ImpeachBarrySoetoro October 11, 2010, 12:10:13 PM
Drudge has linked to two stories on this

http://www.drudgereport.com/
http://www.concordmonitor.com/article/219670/couple-state-took-our-baby
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=213149
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: Sailor October 11, 2010, 12:39:18 PM
Drudge has linked to two stories on this

http://www.drudgereport.com/
http://www.concordmonitor.com/article/219670/couple-state-took-our-baby
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=213149


 Small victory! Brick by brick we will save America. Thank you Jesus! This child will be returned to the parents. Let us keep up prayer,fasting and action in this case! The Government offices will be open tomorrow and we need to call and let them know children belong with parents not the State. The State is not God!
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: donnay October 11, 2010, 12:43:10 PM

 Small victory! Brick by brick we will save America. Thank you Jesus! This child will be returned to the parents. Let us keep up prayer,fasting and action in this case! The Government offices will be open tomorrow and we need to call and let them know children belong with parents not the State. The State is not God!

Amen!
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: donnay October 11, 2010, 12:53:26 PM
"Oath Keeper Baby" fam shows controversial documents (New Hampshire)

http://ridleyreport.com/video/ridleyreport/2010/oct/oath_keeper_baby_fam_shows_controversial_documents_new_hampshire
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: citizenx October 11, 2010, 05:05:59 PM

 Small victory! Brick by brick we will save America. Thank you Jesus! This child will be returned to the parents. Let us keep up prayer,fasting and action in this case! The Government offices will be open tomorrow and we need to call and let them know children belong with parents not the State. The State is not God!
I'll fee a lot better when this case is at least re-opened by the State of New Hampshire or when the child is returned to its parents.  Lets' not celebrate prematurely.

(Though, yes, it is a good thing as Drudge is more likely to get picked up by the MSM.)
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: thnkfstpal October 11, 2010, 08:33:18 PM
There is no "side" to "believe".

The Dyncorp operatives came in and snatched a 16 hour old baby from its parents. Where is there any side?

Yes, after over 20 explanations on every miniscule detail of this issue, your blatant "confusion" into what it means for a corporation like Dyncorp to have the power to snatch a 16 hour old baby from its parents does not add up.

Well then he probably should seek some kind of test to find out. What the hell does that have to do with the Dyncorp child slavery institute having the power to mislead judges with fraudulent claims in order to rip babies out of their mother and father's arms and then demonize the parents based on a bunch of bullshit?

The denials get more absurd every hour.

What about them, they are not his child.

What does that have to do with Dyncorp coming over and ripping a child out of the mother and father's arms? Does your personal belief about your ability to control the activity in your organs mean that the Dyncorp paid off operatives have the right to just rip out babies from hospitals like it was their own child slavery factory?

Yes, we are missing the payoffs by Dyncorp, the assassinations of the whistle blowers, the IBM analytics that does comprehensive searches on all pregnant mothers to find out which babies are "ripe" for the Dyncorp farm workers. We are missing so, so, so very much.

Go ahead and wait, we have heard the interview and seen the documents. A baby was ripped out of its parents arms, that is very clear. It was done by using Oath Keepers as an excuse to do it, that is doubly clear. Every second that Dyncorp forces the state to stop justice is another second that millions wake up to WTF the East India Trading Company child slavery aparatus is and what a clear and present danger it represents to national security.

My least favorite part about the story is the continued denial by the willfully ignorant to think that being separated means you have to allow Dyncorp to rip babies out of your arms at 16 hours into their life. The fake Dyncorp psuedo directive (hardly law) of snatching babies for not obeying a Nazi directive should raise millions more eyebalss. Especially the tens of millions of parents whose divorces are not finalized and now realize they have a mark on them open to Dyncorp for baby snatching.

You are saying that a hospital has no way to check the parental nature of the baby? You are also saying that the hospital should contact Dyncorp if a person is a member of Oath Keepers who is claiming to be the father? You are also interjecting shit that was not in the affidavit. In other words, you are now using 6 degrees of speculation to give Dyncorp Nazis the power to steal more babies from their parents. WTF dude, are you for real?

Other than every single solitary thing, I guess you have a point.

The Neo Nazis and the KKK have a foundation in racial segregation and using covert and violent means to push their agenda onto the people. Also they are both controlled by the FBI to help provoke a civil war for the Queen Bitches. This is on record for decades exposed by the Church commission to investigate CoIntelPro. The KKK specifically as run by the FBI. The FBI agents were the ones that lynched random black men, shot civil rights leaders, and bombed chirches. This is on record. The Neo Nazis are for the most part a group that is controlled by ADL, SPLC, and the FBI. Watch American History X for a little bit of edumacation.

The Oath Keepers are an open group of law enforcement and military who refuse to follow illegal orders against the people they have taken an oath to protect. If you have never read the oath an oath taker takes, you probably should. It would make anyone proud to be an American. It basically limits the ability for an outside usurper to turn the military and our law enforcement against us. They also include all races, nationalities, religions.

Oath Keepers is not a militia (not that there is anything wrong with the second amendment, it is just not what oath keepers is). Perhaps you would be wise to do a moderate amount of research before spewing such blatant nonsensical statements.

That is a lie, the neo-nazis and KKK are controlled by the FBI. They are not allowed to practice free speech at all.

That is because they were set up by the FBI to be hate groups. That is their purpose. Have you even read the Church commission reports on CoIntelPro?

Your supposition is false, your argument is false, your evidence is non-existent, your logical reasoning contains no logic...can you guess how much truth your conclusion has?

Saying Oath Keepers is a hate group is like saying Mars is a banana.

LOL LOL LOL LOL!!!

great. If the guy who is rationalizing evil is actually a real person and not a paid shill he needs to wake the frack up.
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: freeyourmindsamerika October 11, 2010, 08:36:41 PM
Hey everybody, I have some important news here. First let me start off by saying that I am a defender of liberty and a member of We Are Change. I believe that we always need to deeply research everything that we take issue with. Now just for the sake of discussion and further investigation. I want everyone to know and research this info. I am not sure if somebody in this huge discussion has already brought this up.Anyway, There is info here that the Father Irish. Has been accused of abuse against Ms. Taylor and two sons from a previous marriage and that his failure to take domestic abuse deterant classes have led to the actions taken by dcyf. I just want to hear if anyone can confirm or deny this info. SO go out and do the work infowarriors and lets see what is up here. We have to stay calm and level headed. So we don't look like the asses the mainstream media wants to make out of us. Don't give them any ammunition.  Here is a link to the info I found. Not sure of the truth lets see what we can uncover. http://littlebytesnews.amplify.com/2010/10/09/updatenh-newborn-baby-girl-taken-from-parents-by-dcyf-for-past-abuse-or-political-affiliation-tcot-news-
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: citizenx October 11, 2010, 08:44:08 PM
CONFIRMED: Court Did Rely on Oath Keeper Association to Take Baby
     

Stewart Rhodes
Oathkeepers
Oct 11, 2010

There has been some confusion about this case, leading some commentators to believe that the reference to John Irish’s “association” with Oath Keepers was in some other document, rather than in the affidavit relied on by the Court’s Order.  Alex Jones’ site, in an effort to protect the privacy of the family, posted excerpts from two different documents, leading some to question where the reference actually was.

To clear that up, below you will find an embedded PDF which contains the full (though redacted) versions of the following documents:  the two Petitions (one pertaining to each parent), the Court’s Ex Parte Order, the  Affidavit of Dana Bickford which was attached, the Motion for Change of Venue, and lastly, the Notice to Accused Parent, explaining the legal process.   We have highlighted in yellow all text where the Petitions or the Court Order refers to the Affidavit which contains reference to Oath Keepers.

By looking at the below documents, you will be able to see from the two Petitions, the Order, and Affidavit item #7, in that order, that...



to read the rest, see:

http://www.prisonplanet.com/confirmed-court-did-rely-on-oath-keeper-association-to-take-baby.html
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: Dig October 11, 2010, 11:19:49 PM
Hey everybody, I have some important news here. First let me start off by saying that I am a defender of liberty and a member of We Are Change. I believe that we always need to deeply research everything that we take issue with. Now just for the sake of discussion and further investigation. I want everyone to know and research this info. I am not sure if somebody in this huge discussion has already brought this up.Anyway, There is info here that the Father Irish. Has been accused of abuse against Ms. Taylor and two sons from a previous marriage and that his failure to take domestic abuse deterant classes have led to the actions taken by dcyf. I just want to hear if anyone can confirm or deny this info. SO go out and do the work infowarriors and lets see what is up here. We have to stay calm and level headed. So we don't look like the asses the mainstream media wants to make out of us. Don't give them any ammunition.  Here is a link to the info I found. Not sure of the truth lets see what we can uncover. http://littlebytesnews.amplify.com/2010/10/09/updatenh-newborn-baby-girl-taken-from-parents-by-dcyf-for-past-abuse-or-political-affiliation-tcot-news-

Read this thread and listen to the interviews, they both stated that like many other things...manipulation and fraud are occuring with the accusations which have never been verified. And the whole idea of "domestic abuse" as if you are either mother theresa or "the burning bed" husband is a bit overplayed. If suspected domestic abuse based on a 5 minute interview with a heavily sedated person which has never been verified allowed dyncorp to snatch any baby then Bill Clinton would have been snatched 16 hours into his life. The fact is that Dyncorp's baby snatching cartel manufactures such issues all of the time. I am very curious as to why the other outlets are not chronicling the CPS/Dyncorp history of institutionalized insanity. It is as if they just want to hide their heads in the sand as if it does not happen...

The Finders

Franklin Cover Up

There are over 100 other such cases of conspiracies to snatch children and profit from their enslavement by CPS/Dyncorp/fake government agencies that represent a clear and present danger to national security.
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: Dig October 11, 2010, 11:29:46 PM
UN – U.S. Government Subsidized DynCorp Cover Up :
http://politicalvelcraft.org/2010/08/28/un-along-with-u-s-government-subsidized-dyncorp-cover-up-child-pedophile-sex-slave-scandals-continue-wave-after-wave-of-child-abuse-reports-pour-forward-from-all-over-the-globe/
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: Dig October 11, 2010, 11:34:54 PM
I came to this book by John W DeCamp after reading George Bush: The Unauthorized Biography by Webster G. Tarpley & Anton Chaitkin which can be found at
http://www.tarpley.net/bushb.htm

There is a documentary entitled Conspiracy fo Silence, which is on googe video
http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=conspiracy+of+silence&emb=0&aq=f#

The Franklin Cover-Up is horrifying but at the same time will give you a glimpse of how vile the NWO really is.

Foreward
" 'What do Ronald Reagan, President George Bush, former CIA Director William E, Colby, Democratic presidential candidate Bob Kerry, billionaire and second richest man in Americaand now head of Saloman Brothers, Warren Buffet, and Ronald Roskens, the current administrator of the Agency for International Development, all have in common?' I asked my close friend and advisor William Colby one day in 1991.

'I give up,' former head of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) Colby siad. 'What could that group have in common?'

'Three things,' I replied, 'All of them a burden at times for those who have to carry them. The three things are me (John DCamp), a case called Franklin and a man named Larry King.

'Are you serious?' Colby asked.

'Dead serious,' I responded. 'And I hope that word 'dead' does not turn out to be a prophetic pronouncement, as it has for at least fifteen other Franklin-related personalities.'

My statement to Bill Colby was not made lightly. Colby and his wife, Sally Shelton Colby, a United States ambassador under President Jimmy Carter, were at that very moment warning me to get away from the Franklin child abuse investigation, Larry King, and anybody else linked with Franklin, as quickly as possible for the sake of my own life and safety.

Sally and Bill had never talked to me like this before. They sat me down, made it clear that this was not one of our routine discussions about life and health and happiness, and emphasized to me the serious nature of what and whom I was dealing with.

'What you have to understand, John, is that sometimes there are forces and events too big, too powerful, with so much at stake for other people or institutions, that you cannot do anything about them, no matter how evil or wrong they are and no matter how dedicated or sincere you are or how much evidence you have."



Timeline
http://www.franklincase.org/timeline.htm



http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2191775825470516271
"Stunning revelations from former Nebraska Senator John DeCamp. Followup to his book, the Franklin Cover-up, movie Conspiracy of Silence, and his other legal cases



Rusty Nelson, former Franklin photographer, tells horrific tales of life as a political prisoner, including false charges as a sex offender, forced injections, massive drugging, and sleep deprivation.
Pt.1  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ahhotahp8Ck&feature=channel_page
Pt.2  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ThBpPvTn4nk&feature=related
Pt.3  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SXa6mjXg-Go&feature=related
Pt.4  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YeOU-EDnvFo&feature=related
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: Dig October 11, 2010, 11:49:45 PM
(http://www.stewwebb.com/Finders%25201%2520of%25203.jpg)(http://files.abovetopsecret.com/files/01e6e22130c10637.jpg)

http://educate-yourself.org/cn/ciadrugsabusemurder.shtml

http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=184118.0

http://www.educate-yourself.org/tg/

http://www.voxfux.com/features/cia_child_sex.html
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: Freeski October 11, 2010, 11:51:04 PM
Rings within rings within rings...
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: Sailor October 12, 2010, 08:06:36 AM
Hey everybody, I have some important news here. First let me start off by saying that I am a defender of liberty and a member of We Are Change. I believe that we always need to deeply research everything that we take issue with. Now just for the sake of discussion and further investigation. I want everyone to know and research this info. I am not sure if somebody in this huge discussion has already brought this up.Anyway, There is info here that the Father Irish. Has been accused of abuse against Ms. Taylor and two sons from a previous marriage and that his failure to take domestic abuse deterant classes have led to the actions taken by dcyf. I just want to hear if anyone can confirm or deny this info. SO go out and do the work infowarriors and lets see what is up here. We have to stay calm and level headed. So we don't look like the asses the mainstream media wants to make out of us. Don't give them any ammunition.  Here is a link to the info I found. Not sure of the truth lets see what we can uncover. http://littlebytesnews.amplify.com/2010/10/09/updatenh-newborn-baby-girl-taken-from-parents-by-dcyf-for-past-abuse-or-political-affiliation-tcot-news-

   No stay focused! If these two parents are perfect parents or imperfect parents that does not mean the State can steal every baby these two parents with rights give birth to. The State stealing the new baby by linking the Father to Oath Keepers is the issue. So no Thank you of the rabbit hole. Frankly even is it is true it is none of our or the States business. These matters are best dealt with by the parents,family,friends and Church community not the State. Stay focused grasshopper  ;D  
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: jfranko4 October 12, 2010, 09:00:42 AM
ALERT ALERT!!!

Mainstream media in the UK have picked this up, email it to drudge, STAT!

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1319827/Couple-newborn-baby-taken-away-fathers-involvement-Oath-Keepers.html
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: Dig October 12, 2010, 09:19:54 AM
ALERT ALERT!!!

Mainstream media in the UK have picked this up, email it to drudge, STAT!

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1319827/Couple-newborn-baby-taken-away-fathers-involvement-Oath-Keepers.html

wow! it is no longer national news, it is now international news!
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: jfranko4 October 12, 2010, 09:37:50 AM
yes dig this is probably the most read newspaper in the UK, it is complete scum but any coverage is good coverage. Hopefully this will get picked up other organisations soon.
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: Dig October 12, 2010, 09:47:20 AM
yes dig this is probably the most read newspaper in the UK, it is complete scum but any coverage is good coverage. Hopefully this will get picked up other organisations soon.

this is really huge. thanks for the catch. feel free to start a new thread about this. it cannot be understated how important it is that people like Nancy Schaffer and others' work has not been in vain. Also shows the power of constitution enforcing oath keepers and the level headed stuart rhodes.
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: rtjwilde October 12, 2010, 10:05:17 AM
I found this on the ADL (Anti-Defamation League) website.
http://www.adl.org/main_Extremism/oath_keepers_three_percenters.htm
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: jfranko4 October 12, 2010, 10:06:31 AM
thanks dig i made a new thread. Yeah this is totally braid spasticatingly massive, i cannot believe they actually picked up on this.
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: rtjwilde October 12, 2010, 06:59:20 PM
It appears that ADL has taken the page down for the link I posted earlier. Maybe they're getting scared?
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: citizenx October 12, 2010, 08:46:57 PM
link seems to be working still
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: Satyagraha October 14, 2010, 04:10:04 PM
October 14th, 2010
High Noon for New Hampshire DCYF: Oath Keepers Sheriffs and Police Issue Demand Letter
http://oathkeepers.org/oath/2010/10/14/high-noon-for-new-hampshire-dcyf-oath-keepers-sheriffs-and-police-issue-demand-letter/

This morning, at approximately 10am, October 14, 2010, the Sheriffs and police leaders within Oath Keepers delivered their demand letter to New Hampshire DCYF  on behalf of all sheriffs and police within our organization, as well as on behalf of the military and emergency personnel in our organization.  The letter calls for removing our organization’s name from the affidavit that was relied upon by the court and adopted as the court’s finding of facts in it’s order.

We certainly hope that further, meaningful  scrutiny of the New Hampshire DCYF will be undertaken by the state’s attorney general and legislature. The use of political association in a child protective proceeding is good cause to question the training and the motives of those involved in this case.

But our demand letter is focused on securing a retraction on behalf of our membership and in defense of free speech for all.  That would be a good first step.

Stewart Rhodes
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: jshowell October 14, 2010, 04:11:19 PM
THEY WON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The baby's COMING HOME, LIVE NOW:  http://www.thewatchmen.biz/Live.html
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: EvadingGrid October 14, 2010, 04:17:35 PM
THEY WON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The baby's COMING HOME, LIVE NOW:  http://www.thewatchmen.biz/Live.html

I hope this is true, and not some trick.
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: jshowell October 14, 2010, 04:20:03 PM
I hope this is true, and not some trick.


It was an interview with John Irish and Kevin Noyes who's helped get the word out for the family.  The CPS might be trying a trick, but they're going to have a welcome home party for cheyenne today.  Check out their facebook page for updates.
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: Dig October 14, 2010, 04:50:32 PM
It was an interview with John Irish and Kevin Noyes who's helped get the word out for the family.  The CPS might be trying a trick, but they're going to have a welcome home party for cheyenne today.  Check out their facebook page for updates.

This is indeed great news as the baby will be out of immediate harm and further possible abuse, but yeah, the NWO's Child Pedophile Services have got over 100 tricks up their sleaves and always be vigilant in the face of their progressive insanity. Lawsuits are definitely needed as well as restraining orders against every single cop on the CPS/Dyncorp/Nazi Pharma payroll.
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: citizenx October 14, 2010, 05:24:15 PM
Wow, what a diffrence a day makes.  That is great news. And, yes, the CPS is probably not out of their live unfortunately.  We still need to fight the utterly dysfunctional and often criminal system of the CPS nationwide.

The foster care system needs to be scrapped entirely for one thing.  No one should have to pay you to raise your child.

If you did away with that, CPS would be snatching a whole hell of a lot fewer babies -- having nowhere to shuttle them, like into the arms of these apparently abusive foster parents.

What about the other children in their care.

This thing really ain't over.

On another note my mother who was a juvenile referee (judge) for years believes we should do away witht the foster care system and return to orphanages which often gave and still give better care to children.  Somedays, I think she is right.

We could at least do away with the incentive for all the wrong people to become foster parents.
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: donnay October 14, 2010, 05:39:36 PM
We should do away with CPS (and the other like-named organizations according to the states)!

We should do away with Family courts as well!

They are never looking out for the best interest of the children.

Let it go back to churches and communities outreach programs!!
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: egypt October 14, 2010, 05:46:25 PM
I hope baby Cheyenne is in her parents arms.

CPS is known to promise *anything* to achieve their agenda in getting the couple to agree, for instance, to a "Case Plan."  This document is essential in that parents then give up their rights in agreeing that they need to seek counseling, take parenting courses, visitations & whatever other arrangements are outlined in the Plan to get their child back.  Most parents are all too willing to simply agree -- especially how it is presented to them that this is all they have to do to get their child back.

Big mistake to speak with or agree to anything CPS.

It essentially is a document that shows the court that the parents agree they are child abusers.  The machine gears grind on, from there.

One couple (in Georgia), with the father arrested and in jail unable to appear before the court, see the public defender, or anything else, just sits.  Last I knew, it had been 10 months like this as CPS was busy "trying" to build a case against him, but had run into brick walls.  The mother was promised by CPS that "if they could just do a home inspection" her children would be returned.  She did the inspection, of course.  However, all they did was make up more lies about her home as further fabrication to the "child abuse case."  A perfect example of trying to justify after-the-fact of removal, the basis for that removal.

I hope the Irish's do not capitulate to one single thing in getting their child back.  It will simply be  used at a later date for another removal & more persecution.  CPS is a mastermind in building what is called "a preponderance of evidence."  Preponderance of evidence is a buildup of little things that point to what is being alluded to (child abuse).

CPS is a system that should not exist.  We have laws, already, to handle the criminal acts of abuse.  We even have police to go get the perpetrators.  Big bonus $dollars are to be had in nabbing a child abuser.  Dumping $billions upon billions of our tax dollars into a System to persecute outside of the law is not ok.

Love, e
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: citizenx October 14, 2010, 05:48:27 PM
We should do away with CPS (and the other like-named organizations according to the states)!

It's certainly hard to argue against that right now, too.

Whatever did we do before CPS?  Doesn't seem like it could have been half this bad.
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: birther truther tenther October 14, 2010, 07:50:36 PM
The parents got their baby back.

Alex just announced it during the Moneybomb marathon at 6:50pm Austin time.
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: James Madison October 14, 2010, 08:04:10 PM
I'm so glad for them, awesome news!!!!
: Re: Government Seizes Newborn Baby Over Political Beliefs Of Parents [Oathkeepers]
: Rebelitarian October 14, 2010, 08:13:40 PM
Believe me we need a CPS like we need a labor department and a police department.  There are bad people out there.

NYS is odd cuz they'll actually nab one abusive family after harassing 4-5.  The problem lies with the whole inability to face your accuser.  So any teacher's assistant can call CPS for any reason and not suffer any recriminations.  To this day I have no idea who reported on me.  It turned out to be false.  However there should be the same burden of proof that the police are required to use.  Hearsay is never evidence in a court but with CPS that's all it takes.