Posted on 10/09/2010 4:18:34 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Well, the verity of the whole snatch story aside, what pisses me off is that they are doing a bang up job with this “a militia known as the Oath Keepers” crap. Oath Keepers is in no way, shape or form a militia. “Militia” is another straw man buzzword to describe any sort of “organization” that disagrees with socialism and the destruction of the US Constitution.
I have to say that anyone who writes this way makes it very difficult for the reader. I found it very difficult to follow.
Is the entire affadavit on the internet somewhere? I’ve seen only the front page and it didn’t make much sense - it’s titled Change of Venue with no date. Why would an order to take a baby from the parents refer to a Change of Venue? There’s absolutely no reference in the doc to the father purchasing guns without a license!
I’d like to know and the author isn’t saying - where the additional information (abuse of the mother and her two kids, divorce etc.,) came from. We’ve all been waiting for further developments but this hasn’t cleared up anything in my opinion.
I have seen a couple of threads about this. Something is wrong about all of this.
You need a license to buy a gun in NH ?
Awhong with and what is supposed to be wrong with Oath Keepers. Whatever else is wrong, OK can not be the cause.
The oathkeepers are NOT a militia, or any kind of subversive or anarchist group. We do not advocate any violence or physical revolutionary actions. We will not start anything or act in any unlawful manner. You will need to look elswhere if that is what you want.
We follow the axiom “reach, teach, and inspire”. Our goal is to make sure ALL people who have taken an oath (active military, military veterans, law enforcement active and retired, and firefighters / EMTs) WILL NOT FOLLOW unlawful orders that subvert our Constitutional rights. The basic precept is simply that one’s oath to defend the constitution (from enemies both foreign and domestic) does not expire upon retirement, separation, or discharge.....period. Our method of defending the Constitution is by way of education and inspiration.
Understand we are ALL as citizens required to follow the law, but oathkeepers promise to not obey and urge others to not obey any ILLEGAL orders handed down that do not comply with our rights as defined by our Constitution and legally passed laws. Please, be informed, visit the website and understand what we are about.
Now, if the government engages in some illegal and unconstitutional move against the national citizenry, then I am of the mind that most of the members would end up doing the right thing on their OWN joining like minded patriots, but not as part of this organization.
The majority of the Oathkeepers membership are clear minded law abiding citizens who have put their lives on the line at some point in their lives to physically defend the Constitution from foreign enemies, and whose purpose now is to spread the word, not violence, to defend same from domestic enemies.
Do not believe for one second that just because some of us are combat veterans, gun owners, conservatives or defenders of the constitution that we are all domestic terrorists as our government believes, ready to go to war against our government......NOTHING could be further from the truth.
The issue is primarily a serial child-endangered and domestic-violence case in which an unemployed, one-eyed gun nut who repeatedly beats and chokes his wife who loves him. The family has been under the state’s watch for some time. The state already filed to end the mother’s parental rights to the two older children. The father didn’t complete a court-ordered domestic-violence course.
In short, the parents are violent dirtbags and the Oath Keepers should stay away from the parents or soil their reputation.
Also, the state should seize his guns and rescind any probation. This a crisis that must be solved.
Have all the allegations you listed been proven true, in a court of law, or are you taking the word of the bureaucrats in New Hampshire? My experience with Iowa’s DHS is that it is a nest of men-hating lesbians and other PC leftists. But I’m sure that New Hampshire is nothing like that...
I have enjoyed your posts for a long time and learned a lot from you. Nice to meet you.
From the Concord Monitor (slanted leftist media!), the affidavit served on John Irish said a JUDGE determined that Irish abused Taylor’s two other children and her. A HEARING to end her parental rights to the two older children has been held and the decision in pending. A JUDGE ordered Irish to meet all conditions after his domestic-violence incident(s). He didn’t. Her divorce has been delayed because he won’t sign the papers. I haven’t had this much legal trouble (no arrests) in 60 years than this kid has had in his 22 years.
I know that family-court is its own hell but look at the evidence, numerous hearings, judge-ordered findings, and ask is he a martyr or a dirtbag?
You may be right, but upon what evidence do you make your determination?
It appears to me there is more to the incident than what has been in the press. That does not mean that the accusations of child endangerment are valid. You cannot always judge a person by his appearances.
As presented this does not pass the smell test, so how can you come to your conclusions and suggested action by the state? Unless you have seen the evidence.
I’ve never seen the inside of a jail in 50 years. I hadn’t seen or maybe skipped over the judge thing, so I apologize.
Right, you can’t always judge a person but, in my experience, I can judge a judge, watch a judge judges all parties involve, observe legal and medical professional people and follow objective standards.
Judges and juries have a tough job sifting the evidence, the alibis, liars, lawyers confusing the record, expert witnesses, reluctant witnesses, etc.
Then they render verdicts, using their long-life BS meter, conduct in court, the probability of truth, and because there is fire, there’s smoke.
Judges see cases like this all the time, repeat offenders. Judges also see smokescreens like de jure and common-law juries all the time too.
This dirtbag is not my conservative brethren.
This is BS.
LOL. Me neither. I already said I’ve never been arrested. I did work around the judicial system for a long time.
Do you know the Judge in question?
No, and too many people have spent too much time about this man, including me.
You’re instincts may be correct. I found this sensible sounding analysis after our exchange. A lot has happened in a day to uncover some of the facts.
“To those running with the Oath Keeper story, it’s NOT what they want you to believe.:”
Looks like he has a prior record and it is possible the inclusion of the “Oath Keeper” reference is a forgery of the documents.
If so there is another perp.
Tell that to Joshua Douglass who hasn’t seen his children in 3 years! He was just cleared of all wrong doing. His eldest daughter was molested in foster care while he was denied ANY contact with them. Here is his story.
http://www.psalm127v3.blogspot.com/
I am not saying that Irish is innocent. I am just saying that you can’t make that determination because he was accused and had his child removed.
Not sure how it works in NH, but what I know of these hearings is that they are commonly rubber-stamp affairs which accept the allegations of the CPS as gospel and require the (for want of a better term) defendant to prove their innocence.
The burden of proof is on the accused, and proving you didn't do something is not only darned difficult as a practical matter, but the presumption of guilt is unconstitutional.
Often these proceedings are initiated on the word of the estranged spouse (often the opening gambit in a custody battle), and any investigation assumes the worst. Keep in mind "abuse" need not involve physical contact, "neglect" might only involve going to the bathroom while a child is playing. It depends on how the vague criteria are applied, but even innocuous events which virtually any parent could be 'guilty' of can be parsed to seem heinous.
So an active child who gets a bruise, bumps their head, or scrapes their knee can readily be portrayed as a victim of abuse or neglect, and seeking medical services for a more serious injury received at play can open the door to allegations as well, even though there was no neglect or abuse involved.
The rules are written such that unless the person is aware of all the criteria there is virtually no way to avoid being accused once you are under scrutiny. That is no accident.
Often parents who are careful with and not abusive to their children respond with a 'deer in the headlights' reaction to being portrayed as monsters, and often, they are shunned by the community as if they were guilty of heinous acts despite their innocence.
The whole 'anger management', parenting classes bit not only increases the budget of the local CPS office and the relative status of the employees there, it also increases the amount of control which can be exercised by LSWs who commonly have never had children of their own and are going only on theory they learned in college.
I'm not saying there are no nasty bastards out there who abuse their children, there are, but the really nasty ones are also far more intimidating to the average social worker than law abiding parents who have no idea how to game the system or what they are up against.
That friends support these people indicates to me that this is likely the result of overzealous action on the part of CPS, possibly fueled by a coming custody dispute.
I may be wrong, granted, but unless you or someone you know has dealt with such things, you have no clue how the system can work against even the best of parents, and how it can be manipulated by the unscrupulous for their own ends.
Note that there is no need to mention Oath Keepers if the CPS has a valid case. The case would stand on its own merits, regardless of the political affiliations of the defendents. Dogpiling 'reasons' does not constitute evidence, and in this case, the bias against an organization and its misrepresentation as a "Militia" in the allegations (as if being part of a Militia would make someone abusive toward their children--a clear leftist bias) indicates a statist bias against the parents, not as abusers, but for political reasons.
That said, the time to really lawyer up and fight the allegations was when the first allegations were made, and not having done so will be used against these people as best the CPS can do so. Not jumping through the hoops (complying with the order to take the 'class') will not help, either, and will be used to portray these people as scofflaws, regardless of the reason(s) the class was not taken.
Anyone who ends up in this situation who is not guilty had best better get a good lawyer, quick, and indicate they will fight as long and hard as it takes to clear their name.
I'll leave you with this thought: Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." CS Lewis
Fantastic post. Please see my post 18. Sad story there and the family is still not reunited.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.