Friday, October 08, 2010

Yes, I Know

I've been in touch with Stewart. He's looking into it.

For now, I think the best thing to do is let him establish what the facts are.
Posted by David Codrea at 10/08/2010 12:00:00 PM

4 comments:

Reg T said...

David,

The facts are already known. PrisonPlanet has posted a copy of the affidavit. Even if the father, or both parents, are guilty of the worst child abuse, neglect, or domestic violence, permitting the "State" to get away with listing someone's political affiliation (not even being members of OK) as a reason to remove a newborn from her family MUST be fought.

Yes, it will go more smoothly if the couple aren't complete monsters, but it still must be fought either way.

Reg T

10/08/2010 12:31 PM
Defender said...

They don't need no steenking DISCLOSE Act. That's why it was allowed to fail to pass in Congress, this time.

10/08/2010 12:58 PM
Defender said...

Update from Reason magazine.

http://reason.com/blog/2010/10/08/baby-snatching-its-hilarious-w

10/09/2010 7:58 PM
Stewart Rhodes said...

Reg T said:

"David,

The facts are already known. PrisonPlanet has posted a copy of the affidavit. Even if the father, or both parents, are guilty of the worst child abuse, neglect, or domestic violence, permitting the "State" to get away with listing someone's political affiliation (not even being members of OK) as a reason to remove a newborn from her family MUST be fought.

Yes, it will go more smoothly if the couple aren't complete monsters, but it still must be fought either way.

Reg T"

Exactly. And we will fight it. Just as in a criminal case (say, for domestic assault) the political associations of the accused would not be admissible as evidence because such is patently irrelevant, and also extremely prejudicial, the political associations of John Irish are entirely irrelevant and prejudicial to the question of whether he endangers his daughter.

Your political associations should never be listed as evidence for why you should have your children taken from you - not in a free country at least. Such politicization of family law, such use of that already dangerous power over parents to now go after political enemies, is fitting only for a dictatorship.

We will fight this regardless of the supposed validity of the other allegations. This use of political associations as evidence is wrong in every case, and in any case. It is the "weaponization" of CPS - turning it into a weapon against political undesireables. And that weapon will be used to silence and suppress those who might otherwise speak out, and to silence and suppress those who already have spoken out. It will thus chill speech even when not used (just by the implied threat that you may be paid a visit by CPS if you get "uppity"), and it will punish speech when used against dissidents who still dare to speak out.

Even if used rarely, the public knowledge that it may be used against you if you speak out will serve to chill speech. That's the whole point of such arbitrary power - make a few examples, and it accomplishes its job without even having to use it much - just the threat chills speech and silences people.

Sadly, so dumbed down is the average American that many just cannot grasp that elemental concept and want to know whether the parents are "guilty" as if that would make it OK to list their political associations or gun owner status as evidence of why they are unfit parents.

If people cannot understand why this cannot be allowed to happen, then how can we restore our Republic?

Rules of due process and protections of free speech and association apply to EVERYONE, not just those who are pure as the driven snow.

So, regardless of whether the parents are guilty of any of the alleged abuse, the listing of their association with Oath Keepers is illegitimate and must be fought. And it will.

Stewart Rhodes,

Founder of Oath Keepers

10/10/2010 3:20 AM

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)