Government Agents Seize Oath Keeper's New Born From Hospital

[ejt1469]

True? Don't know...

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OvZRM-P46rI[/ame]

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 a 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

 

[Hitman]

iop1

 

[Hitman]

This is by the Founder on their site;

Makes a lot of good points.

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

 

[CavalryJim]

This is by the Founder on their site;

Yes, there are other, very serious allegations. Out of respect for the privacy of the parents, we will not publish the affidavit.

UPDATE : 10/07/2010 10.53PM PST --

There is more to this story than taking the baby because he is a member of the Oath Keepers.

Reading the entire statement sounds like the problem, as he sees it, is that being a member of the Oath Keepers is mentioned in the affidavit...implying that membership is a bad thing.

 

[SirIsaacNewton]

My wife worked for DCF and they only remove children in extreme circumstances. She only participated in two and both resulted in her being emotionally distraught. Who knows what other variables are unaccounted for he could be molesting his fiances daughter/son or something. You really just don't know what people are capable of....

 

[SeventhSon]

My wife works for OCS. Contrary to popular beliefs, Child Protection does not just come in and snatch kids without due cause. Like SirIsaacNewton said above, you would be surprised at what seemingly "ordinary looking" people can do when the doors are closed.

 

[spanky]

My wife works for OCS. Contrary to popular beliefs, Child Protection does not just come in and snatch kids without due cause. Like SirIsaacNewton said above, you would be surprised at what seemingly "ordinary looking" people can do when the doors are closed.

I wouldn't. Ive seen Running Scared.

 

[machinedrummer]

My wife works for OCS. Contrary to popular beliefs, Child Protection does not just come in and snatch kids without due cause. Like SirIsaacNewton said above, you would be surprised at what seemingly "ordinary looking" people can do when the doors are closed.

I totally agree SBV. There is more than just chicken and sausage in that gumbo. Still a sad situation if it is true either way.

 

[Sin-ster]

I wouldn't. Ive seen Running Scared.

As an aside-- that woman "sicko" was smoking hot.

And yeah, I'd probably have to read the entire affidavit before I was willing to pass judgement on this. As always, if the story is 100% true as written-- scary stuff. But I doubt that's the case.

 

[Nolacopusmc]

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w72CdkXYOXs[/ame]

 

[richiespng]

Those darn dingos.

 

[Yrdawg]

Havin that same problem here in SouthWest too...dingos and or coyotes are killin chihuas all over the place....I have not ruled out chupecabra

 

[ejt1469]

As the below document makes clear (http://www.scribd.com/doc/38939569/Hsac-Cve-Working-Group-Recommendations ), Southern Poverty Law Center is Now Officially Part of DHS. The CEO of SPLC now sits on the DHS “Working Group on Countering Violent Extremism” along with the leaders of other So-called Non Government Organizations (but can we really call them such now that they are part of the government?) And select “law enforcement” officers such as the Clark County Nevada Sheriff, Doug Gillespie. 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.
When you read the below document, keep in mind the current ordeal of the Irish family where their newborn baby was taken based on an affidavit that notes the father’s “association with a militia group known as Oath Keepers.”. Pay attention to who sits on this panel (see pages 26-30), to who DOESN’T, how they plan on reaching DHS tentacles down into every level of society, and how they talk overtly about the need to utilize local SOCIAL WELFARE and MENTAL HEALTH agencies to counter “violent extremism.”. In other words, what is now being done to the Irish family will be done all over.
This is the overt politicization of DHS, to use it against political enemies
I will post more on this later today.
Stewart Rhodes


Members of the Countering Violent Extremism
Working Group

...Richard Cohen, President and CEO, Southern Poverty Law Center...

 

[Baldrik78]

There seems to be a little more to this story...looks like this guy has a couple of outstanding warrants, is supposed to be in anger management type courses, which he is skipping and is known for threatening the cops.

He and his fiance had alrady lost rights to their previous 2 children.

Looks like the Oath Keepers are just looking for some publicity. Bad publicity, since they are going to come off as a bunch of wackos, but publicity none the less.

 

[brackishgunner]

Looks like the Oath Keepers are just looking for some publicity. Bad publicity, since they are going to come off as a bunch of wackos, but publicity none the less.

It is a shame that the dude may be a wretch, but a parent who is an Oath Keeper is not committing child abuse, and his involvment with that group should not have been listed as a legal justification for seizing his child. It is telling.

Comical aside. Can you imagine the shtstorm if a Bush-led DHS listed membership in the black panthers as a justification for seizing the children of one of its members?

 

[Hardballing]

This story has all the sound and fury of a Chihuaha, after being spanked on the nose with the paper, running in circles, ass dragging, yelping and peeing on the rug.

So...it was not the Oath Keepers participation but rather his "other" issues that led to the child's seizure. Hmmmmmmm.

Once again, the truth will out.

But NEVER let that get in the way of a good rant by the OK founder.

Question. Why is a guy like this even allowed membership IN the OK's?

 

[Bayoupiper]

ditto the animal rights lunatics during Katrina.

Ah yes, the canoes filled with so many pet carriers that they kept turning over!


As has already been said.

This guy is trying to hide the real reason.
.

 

[ejt1469]

The Blaze (Glenn Beck's news site): http://www.theblaze.com/stories/did-state-take-child-because-dad-belongs-to-oath-keepers/

"Stephanie Taylor and Johnathan Irish of Epsom, NH are fighting to get their baby girl back after she was removed approximately 16 hours after birth last Thursday, the couple says. The couple protested with others, many strangers, outside of Concord Hospital on Friday where the baby may have been moved to. The protesters and parents believe the state took the baby due to Irish’s affiliation with Oath Keepers"

 

[Yrdawg]

And some of you wonder why LE in general is suspicious of these "grass roots" organizations, constitutionalists, etc.???

I had my first dose of right-wing extremists with those CSA assholes from Arkansas; The Covenant, Sword, and Arm of the Lord. What a bunch of TOTAL retards...

Same with the anti-abortion types we saw here at the Bennington Drive clinic; ditto the animal rights lunatics during Katrina.

Having a cause is fine... but when you start maliciously damaging other people's property and trample on THEIR rights, just because you're not happy about something... well, your right to be an activist/******* ends with my right to peace and quiet. And the cops are going to get involved, buckwheat.

.

Just a point of view from an outside observer.....

If someone is killing babies and then some one kills the baby killer....see where this is going ??

Saving a life may not always be legal...like if I had been in Nazi Germany and killed Dr Melienge....I would have been a criminal, yet lives would have been saved

Would my saving lives been taken as a defense ?? aw hell naw...but it would be

Is an abortion Dr being killed in the US called defense of life ?? no , but it really would be

Lookin forward to real fragmentation