Oath Keeper? You can't be trusted.

[armedandsafe]

If you declare publicly that you intend to be honest, keep your word and uphold the law, you can't be trusted to raise children.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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'

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: October 08, 2010
11:35 pm Eastern


By Bob Unruh
© 2010 WorldNetDaily

A 16-hour-old newborn was snatched from her parents by authorities in Concord, N.H., after social services workers alleged the father is a member of Oath Keepers.

The organization collects affirmations from soldiers and peace officers that they would refuse orders that violate the U.S. Constitution, in light of what they perceive as the advance of socialism in the U.S.

The father, Johnathon Irish, told WND that the affidavit signed by Child Protective Service worker Dana Bicford seeking government custody of newborn Cheyenne said the agency "became aware and confirmed that Mr. Irish associated with a militia known as the 'Oath Keepers.'"

Irish, in an interview with WND, said officers and other social services workers ordered him to stand with his hands behind his back, frisked him and then took his daughter from him and his fiancé at Concord Hospital where the baby had been born.

He told WND that other issues cited by authorities included an allegation of child abuse, which he assumed pertained to an incident weeks earlier in which one of his fiance's older sons allegedly was struck by a babysitter.

He said both he and his fiancé had been cleared by authorities in that investigation.

Kathleen Demaris, a spokeswoman for the state agency, refused to comment.

Stewart Rhodes, the founder of Oath Keepers, expressed alarm when contacted by WND, describing the agency as a "chilling monster" that could "come get kids."

On his website, he confirmed the affidavit, along with other allegations, cites Irish's interest in Oath Keepers as a reason to separate the newborn from her parents.

"Yes, there are other, very serious allegations. Out of respect for the privacy of the parents, we will not publish the affidavit. … But please do remember that allegations do not equal facts – they are merely allegations," he said.

"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," Rhodes said.

"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 [nose] under the tent for other associations being considered too risky for parents to dare," he continued. "'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.'"

He noted that the state made no allegation that Oath Keepers is "criminal" or that Irish was committing a crime with his affiliation.

Oath Keepers posted a video by George Heminger, who identifies himself as an independent journalist, who was interviewing Irish by telephone:

Editor's Note: The recording is unedited and includes objectionable language.

Go to http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=213149 to view the video.

"We are not advocating or planning imminent violence, which is the established line where free speech ends and criminal behavior begins," Rhodes continued said. "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 d--- well please so long as we are not advocating or planning imminent violent or directly harming our children (and no, teaching them 'thought crimes' 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)," he said.

"A parent associating with a militia is not engaged in child endangerment and is not evidence of child endangerment," he said.

A promise

Oath Keepers' members promise not to obey any order "to disarm the American people," conduct warrantless searches, "detain American citizens as 'unlawful enemy combatants,'" work to impose martial law, invade or subjugate any state, blockade American cities, put Americans in detention camps or "make war against our own people."

That such circumstances could develop has been suggested by the government itself, in an earlier DHS document that cautioned about the possibility of violence from a variety of "extremists," a label that apparently now is being applied to Irish.

WND reported when a Department of Homeland Security report warned against the possibility of violence by unnamed "right-wing extremists" and singled out returning war veterans as particular threats. The report characterized the extremists as people with concerns about illegal immigration, increasing federal power, restrictions on firearms, abortion and the loss of U.S. sovereignty.

The report, "Right-wing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment," dated April 7, 2009, stated "threats from white supremacist and violent anti-government groups during 2009 have been largely rhetorical and have not indicated plans to carry out violent acts."

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."

Returning veterans

Most notable was the report's focus on the impact of returning war veterans.

"Returning veterans possess combat skills and experience that are attractive to right-wing extremists," it said. "DHS/I&A is concerned that right-wing extremists will attempt to recruit and radicalize veterans in order to boost their violent capacities."

In the Irish family situation, the father told WND that a court hearing is schedule Oct. 14. Until that time, he and his fiancé are ordered to have no contact with their daughter.

He described the state's accusations as "false allegations, fabricated allegations and unfounded fact."

Forum page participants at the Oath Keepers site were enraged:


"Make sure you tell this to everyone you know, if this is allowed, none of us with children are safe, is says the govt can take your children because of your affiliations with certain organizations!!"


"This is so scary!!! If they can do this, what next?"


"Be careful with this. The Republic has real enemies and some of them spend all their time sitting in their mom's basement thinking of ways to get us to overreact and make mistakes by which they can discredit us. This could be real, or it could be deliberate a disinformation tactic, a hard count to draw us offsides. Wait for full verification and full story details before doing anything we all might later regret," suggested another.


"Setting a chilling precedent and in a manner befitting the most tyrannical of regimes, the government seized a newborn baby girl today because the father has associated with the lawful, pro-peace, pro-constitution, anti-violence Oath Keepers. What makes this particularly scary is exactly that, that the 'Oath Keepers' is a peaceful, pro-rule of law organization which supports serving military, veterans, peace officers, and firefighters and reminds them of their oath to the Constitution of the United States in a direct and open manner."

Said Rhodes, "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."

Pops

[NRA_guy]

There has got to be more to the story.

But where is the ACLU with their army of lawyers?

[hogger129]

So they can snatch your kid because of your political beliefs?

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

[jack404]

so if your a member of the known terror organisation the Muslim brother hood you can have 7 kids to 3 different wives and all of it on welfare ( Tarik aziz al hussein of California)

but join a patriotic group and they can steal your kids??

fish dont stink this bad at high noon a week after they where dumped...

ACLU ? parh! ( imagine a dummy being spit across the room)

they love this stuff as it prop's their liberal ideas up while letting them enjoy patriotic folks suffer , and the ACLU love's that

[Marlin T]

This is a complete OUTRAGE doesn't even come close enough to describe this event.

I better stop typing before I get myself banned.

[johnlives4christ]

there would a lot of dead people if they stood between me and my kids.

[CampingJosh]

Lots of angry thoughts through my head right now.

And prayers for this family. To have a child kidnapped by the police and court systems is unbelievable. I hope a good judge puts someone at Child Protective Services behind bars for this one.

[Eddie N]

Originally Posted by CampingJosh

Lots of angry thoughts through my head right now.

And prayers for this family. To have a child kidnapped by the police and court systems is unbelievable. I hope a good judge puts someone at Child Protective Services behind bars for this one.

Under the jail would be a better place.

[ampaterry]

There were a long list of reasons for doing this; being a member of the Oath Keepers "militia" was only one of them. But even listing it as one of MANY reasons is wrong and should be punished. How long would this affadivid last if it had listed one of the reasons as "being black", as "being Muslim", or "associated with Socialists". The leftist press would be ALL OVER this, and not leave it to WND to be the exclusive reporter of the story.

[JoeV]

One thing I have learned about the Internet, is to take everything I read with a grain of salt. WND is notorious for taking things out of context in order to raise the hackles of people who are already pissed off at the gubmit. They thrive and exist on this type of journalism, which is not really journalism at all...it is activism.

This guy that everyone is ready to defend, already has a lengthy record of documented domestic violence, and has failed to complete a court ordered domestic violence class. Here's what WND left out of their article...

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.

The rest of the article at the Source

I'm sure there are a few more skeletons in his closet that WND didn't choose to include in their article, and instead focused on the Oath Keepers portion so you could get all pissed at the gubmit, and ignore this guy's other issues. Actually, I'm not real certain that Oath Keepers would want a member that can't control his behavior because of emotional problems or chemical imbalances in his body. That makes his a ticking time bomb, and very possibly could impair his judgment when clear thinking is required to evaluate a situation.

I dislike the way our freedoms are being trampled, and do not support the current administration, but I caution you to get all the details on a story before committing your support to someone who you probably would not leave alone with your wife or kids. The left is always trying to get conservatives to act in a way that discredits them, and getting flared up over a misleading WND article is just the kind of tricks they use. I would not be surprised to learn that WND is owned and controlled by liberal democrats, and exists to get misinformation online to make well meaning conservatives look foolish once the truth is learned. Always look for several different sources reporting the same story, and look for "completeness" among them to insure accuracy. Even then, be skeptical.

[carver]

Using two sources for this story, some questions still exist. First why would charges of abuse from a sitter, as reported by littlebytesnews.blogspot.com, qulify the mother for abuse herself? Both articles state that Johnathon Irish was supposed to complete a state course on "Ending the Vilonce", which he has not done to this date. It would appear that the News Media were the ones that ran with the story so hard because a part of the charge was that he was a member of a militia. There is more going on here than is being reported.

http://www.unionleader.com/article.a...3-ef5ae2329cbc
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.

http://littlebytesnews.blogspot.com/

, it appears the parents have had domestic abuse issues in the past. Apparently the mother is in the process of or has lost custody of two previous children due to multiple abuse/domestic abuse issues in the past by an unnamed 'caretaker', according to DCYF records. Now they have removed the newborn because the father of the child hasn't completed a required court ordered course on "Ending the Violence" per DCYF. The parents haven't made any statements on the past abuse issues and the removal of the other children, along with the father missing the required course...so there may be more to this than what we know. However, does a past history of abuse and affiliation with a 'militia', according to DCYF give the state legal authority to remove the newborn baby from the couple? Now they have removed the newborn because the father of the child hasn't completed a required court ordered course on "Ending the Violence" per DCYF. The parents haven't made any statements on the past abuse issues and the removal of the other children, along with the father missing the required course...so there may be more to this than what we know.

[carver]

You got it right JoeV. The mother is now saying that Johnathon has never touched her other than to give her a hug. I smell some lies here, and will wait till more news is out on this one. I am a member of Oath Keepers myself, and like you said, I might not want this turkey around me, or my family, if I knew the truth about him.

[armedandsafe]

The point of the matter, in my mind, is including membership in OathKeepers as being a reason for removal of the child. That is what OathKeepers is going to fight, not the decision to remove the child.

Then again, after more information on previous activity by the couple and child services is gathered, it appears that this was arbitrary or capricious, then the couple might be supported by OK (and others.)

If one can have children removed from the home for belonging to an organization which calls for honoring one's oath to the Constitution and Country, where does that leave us, being members of THIS group?

Pops

[johnlives4christ]

it leaves some of us saying it'll never happen to them, and others, like myself, trying to be prepared

[wpage]

Membership in orgs that require special pledges and oaths should be scrutinized. Its one thing to join the Night of Columbus or VFW...
Other groups can be misconstrued and are often on the fringes.

[Hatch]

Originally Posted by johnlives4christ

it leaves some of us saying it'll never happen to them, and others, like myself, trying to be prepared

I wonder... how many crack whores leave the abortion clinic or the hospital with a crack baby every day that aren't questioned, seized, arrested by the police?

that would be "an inconvenient truth" wouldn't it?

[CampingJosh]

Originally Posted by wpage

Membership in orgs that require special pledges and oaths should be scrutinized.

NOT BY ANY GOVERNMENT! We have an inalienable right to free speech and to peaceably assemble. Our government even acknowledged these in the First Amendment.

[johnlives4christ]

Originally Posted by Hatch

I wonder... how many crack whores leave the abortion clinic or the hospital with a crack baby every day that aren't questioned, seized, arrested by the police?

that would be "an inconvenient truth" wouldn't it?

i reckon it is. i know a girl that's baby was born with tremors because it was having crack withdrawls

[Jeff Midguard]

Originally Posted by CampingJosh

NOT BY ANY GOVERNMENT! We have an inalienable right to free speech and to peaceably assemble. Our government even acknowledged these in the First Amendment.

[Jeff Midguard]

Good catch Josh.

[CampingJosh]

I agree that we as individuals should carefully examine any organization that requires oaths, pledges, etc. before we associate ourselves with them. But we should carefully examine any association we choose.

It's up to each person to choose for himself. If you want to be part of a group, that's fine, and you shouldn't be treated any different in the eyes of the law.