Government Agents Seize Oath Keeper's New Born From Hospital(Baby Returned)

Originally posted by Jessicamsa
This sounds like something that would happen in Nazi Germany.

Ever read Jim Marrs' The Rise of The Fourth Reich? One of my favorite books.

You'll never guess where the word 'Homeland' comes from, what American event parallels the false-flag Nazi Reichstag Fire or what American "patriot" legislation parallels the Nazi Enabling Act.

The only question left will be when our grandchildren ask, "were you one of the good Americans?"

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?

www.ronpaulforums.com...

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?

www.ronpaulforums.com...

Long list of reasons? Child abuse? Well, there ya have it... But they will sue anyway hopefully.

reply to post by TrueAmerican


So the taking is genuine, and documented with legal... er, documents. However, there are mitigating circumstances: allegations of child abuse and so forth. However however, his involvement being listed as a reason at all certainly calls whoever was in charge of the case into high suspicion.

reply to post by TrueAmerican

I would not put anything that is being reported as being the absolute truth!
Child abuse by most DCS means the parents ARE Gun Owners. That in and of itself is the reasoning for these nanny state control freaks.
The Oath Keepers and every single organization like them are on the subversive lists of all government agencies that are deemed a protectorate of the present government. They have been labeled and set as subversive just because they are trying to keep the Constitution and those that are supposed to protect it on the straight and narrow!

I am willing to bet that every mention of abuse will be explained as the probability of the child being injured do to the parental handling of firearms. Or merely having them in the home! Don;t forget, the AMA tried to get their member Dr's to ask each and every one of their patients about gun ownership for the purpose of having a back door owners list for local governments to use in case of any Federal confiscation order!

Zindo

reply to post by TrueAmerican


They had better be able to substantiate the allegations of child neglect and abuse, because they had to have that in order to take the child. In some states the mere allegation of either/or can give just cause to remove minors from any home pending an investigation. So anyone for any reason could have reported abuse (real or not) to initiate the removal of this baby from its parents. Sometimes these investigations can drag on for many months....

There are a lot of unanswered questions here, and it all is really starting to smell.

The fact that they would even mention the ties to oath keepers and a purchase of weapons is very unusual, I'd really like to see that document.

It isn't beyond the realm of possibility that some of the allegations will be proven false, but the state will keep custody because of the weapons, and ties to a militia.

It will be interesting to see how this plays out.

In the end, the odds are always on the side of the government, and they will usually make a case, even if they need to fabricate one, including evidence, especially when it gets this much public attention. And of course expect their very best public relations people to soon spin this in the media and to completely demonize these parents and the oath keepers at any and every opportunity to do so.

www.ronpaulforums.com...

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.

You know,you gotta ask yourself or really ask them,just how,in what manner did the .gov become aware of Mr. Irish's involvement in oathkeepers? Are they spying on oathkeepers? Hmmm well are they? Do they care to explain themselves if they are? I couldnt think of a more honorable patriotic group if I tried,are these the type of people we the taxpayers spend our money on to be monitored? If so I want my damn money back and somebody fired while I'm at it,for christs sakes people most of these people are leo/veterens and our .gov is spying on them? Something aint right here,something stinks to high heaven,I can smell it all the way down here in the swamp and it eminates from DC.

Actually, the more I dwell on this fact the madder I get,its time for some major changes in DC,hopefully Nov 2nd will be a shot across the bow,and 2012 will see the end to all incumbants,one can only hope.

Originally posted by Fractured.Facade
reply to post by TrueAmerican

 

They had better be able to substantiate the allegations of child neglect and abuse, because they had to have that in order to take the child.

Uhh, this was a newborn. Was the mother neglectful or abusive in the way she delivered the child?

reply to post by GoldenFleece


Good question... or do they have other children?

We need details! When do we get to see the list of allegations? I hope they post the whole document.

reply to post by nickoli


The trouble is that you very rarely EVER get to know who or how a complaint came from. with Child Services in ANY state. Back in the late 60's most states made reports of abuse by whistle blowers confidential and in some cases completely anonymous!
Zindo

Originally posted by GoldenFleece

Originally posted by Fractured.Facade
reply to post by TrueAmerican

 

They had better be able to substantiate the allegations of child neglect and abuse, because they had to have that in order to take the child.

Uhh, this was a newborn. Was the mother neglectful or abusive in the way she delivered the child?

It is kind of hard for parents to be child abusers when the child is just born.

How can you be neglectful/abusive in delivering the child when you're in a hospital and the delivery is mostly controlled by hospital staff??

The abuse charges are just to give more ammo to take the child. They wanted the child.

The government probably even has a spy or spies in oath keepers in order to gather info and break up the group, as they have done with other groups. Remember hutaree (sp?)?

reply to post by ZindoDoone


Well that may be the case but it does pose some serious questions dont you think? I do not want to live in an America that views the oathkeepers as a threat or subversive group. I really dont because thats not America,the country that views the oathkeepers as a threat is not the country our founders formed and is not the country our constitution describes its something else,something other than a constitutional republic,fascism comes to mind.

I do think this is a line that should be persued by the oathkeepers,they may even be able to sue on defamation charges stand alone from the other case and lets expose their avenue of investigation here,i.e. just how did they come by and verify this information? Preferably asked under oath,I'd like to know,especially their verification process.

...just because someone is a leo or in the military or ex-military or a REAL MEMBER of oathkeepers, doesnt mean they're decent human beings... there are scumbags in every single profession and grouping... the oathkeepers are not exempt from that...

...could this be a witch hunt?... sure... the usofa has a very long history of suppressing rights based upon bogus evidence...

...until we know exactly what the affidavit says and why the state is concerned about the welfare of the newborn, lets just chill out and not get all riled up over suppositions...

This is all going to be really bad if it turns out there were drugs involved or something, if a Mother has alcohol or drugs in her system at the time of birth, it can go down like this and then in the moment any excuse would be a good excuse for the system to take the child away.

I hope it is not the case and this becomes a legend for the parties involved, but who knows, right now the real focus and the energy needs to not go into anger and mob mentality but the baby and her safe return.

The newborn is the focus, pray for her.

Well this definetly sounds like a call to arms and the government may be testing the water before they jump in? I think what everyone has to ask themselves is if you had children would you want them just taken away at a moments notice? Anyone reading or seeing this should be extremely upset and disturbed that they are seeing this andI know this isn't the first time, but how far will it go before its too far for people to realize something is seriously wrong?. I just hope this hits mainstream if it turns out that it was just because he was apart of oath keepers and there is nothing more sinister.

Important Update:

Please also note for the record that the father is not a dues-paying member in Oath Keepers. He had registered for free on Oath Keepers’ now-retired ning system. That in no way makes him a member in Oath Keepers, for any non-dues-paying person could register at that ning site anytime. But it does show his loyalty to this nation’s Constitution and his moral support of Oath Keepers – and – the use of his registration on Oath Keepers’ ning forum system as a reason to separate a new-born baby from its mother in the hospital is a concern which bears much gravity.

Comment #17

oathkeepers.org...

Ahh, so the plot thickens. Turns out the guy is not even a paying member! That means all the less reason for the state to even make such a ridiculous accusation! Wahaha. What idiots. They'll be sued.

reply to post by TrueAmerican

Better be careful, TA. Sounds like your children can be seized just for visiting the Oath Keepers website.

And actually quoting it makes you a terrorist.

reply to post by GoldenFleece


Well they can call me whatever they want. Doesn't mean it's true. And they can call John Irish whatever they want. But doesn't mean that's true either.

Originally posted by GoldenFleece

Originally posted by Fractured.Facade
reply to post by TrueAmerican

 

They had better be able to substantiate the allegations of child neglect and abuse, because they had to have that in order to take the child.

Uhh, this was a newborn. Was the mother neglectful or abusive in the way she delivered the child?

If anything, I'd argue that it's the agency that is abusing this child. They've robbed the child of her 'bonding', which is extremely important in the first few hours/days of birth. What about mother's milk? Their is absolutely nothing, on the market - anywhere, that is equal to the nutrients of mother's milk - in the first several hours. The 'pre'milk is specially designed, specifically for that child.

I really hope there is more to this story, as I just cannot fathom an agency of child advocacy to take such serious and life-altering actions in such haste. Surely the Child Welfare Agency would certainly understand the ramifications of the child/mother separation. Heck, they don't even work this quickly to remove the newborn babies from the arms of inmate mothers. They're usually given appropriate bonding and feeding time.