RE: Oath Keeper Story... Reason Magazine debunking some elements of it?

[tropicangela]

Watching that interview I had a few thoughts.
If they got the DOB on the paper work wrong, is it possible that it was filled out prior to the birth with the expected DOB listed?

John Irish says they baby was in their care for 16 hours but they only got to spend 2 minutes each with her. That sends up a red flare.

The more I think about this the more questions I have. I cant think of a worthier cause than the state stealing children but at the same time the fundamental role of the state is to protect innocent people. The child is an innocent person not a piece of property .

The DYFS and officers wheeled the baby out of the room and then they let the parents spend 2 minutes with her in the nursery saying goodbye, before sending the couple out of the hospital with her crib card. The baby was in the birth suite with them for 16 hours postpartum.

It is important that this couple receives due process and can afford a good lawyer. The State should have evidence of abuse and neglect on this baby, and the previous children should not apply [edit] to preemptively remove her from the hospital.

 

[tropicangela]

Some hospital staff have threatened parents to call DYFS for not vaccinating. So the State's description of a good parent can be very different from mine or yours.

 

[legion]

So how is this 24 year old, disability check collecting, likely child and partner abusing, ward of the state an Oath Keeper?

I thought you would have to take some sort of oath to keep to join an organization called "Oath Keepers."

 

[tropicangela]

So how is this 24 year old, disability check collecting, likely child and partner abusing, ward of the state an Oath Keeper?

I thought you would have to take some sort of oath to keep to join an organization called "Oath Keepers."

I've seen that he belonged to the forum is all. Like you belonging here.

 

[legion]

I've seen that he belonged to the forum is all. Like you belonging here.

Well then, the next time I get a traffic ticket I'll try to stir up a media shitstorm claiming the only reason I was pulled over was because I am Ron Paul.

 

[pcosmar]

So how is this 24 year old, disability check collecting, likely child and partner abusing, ward of the state an Oath Keeper?

I thought you would have to take some sort of oath to keep to join an organization called "Oath Keepers."

Wow, you got all of the unverified Character Assassination points in one sentence.
Why do you support state sponsored slander? And why would you promote it?

He didn't make any claim of being an Oathkeeper. The State did. And that question is between the OathKeepers and the State.

 

[tropicangela]

Well then, the next time I get a traffic ticket I'll try to stir up a media shitstorm claiming the only reason I was pulled over was because I am Ron Paul.

AF already responded to this, here.
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showpost.php?p=2923980&postcount=580

 

[Brian4Liberty]

Possibly. We can debate that later.

What is becoming clear is that the baby was NOT taken "because the father was an Oath Keeper."

As I said in the original thread, the whole story MADE NO SENSE- if being an "Oath Keeper" was the reason for taking the kid, they would take the children of all Oath Keepers.

It appears that The father was trying to whip up support/hysteria for his cause and misled everyone.

That is why several of us urged caution in the original thread- it is important that we get all the details before we grab torches and pitchforks and take to the streets.

Reason's looked into the background. Are you saying that the local police forged 2+years of domestic violence documents?

OK, so has anyone read the actual number 6 that comes before the number 7 on the document (that mentions the Oathkeepers) in the video? Mr. Irish holds it up to the camera. It appears that Ms. Taylor has "utilized" CPS at times in the past. Not that this justifies taking the baby, but it does show that there is a history here, and at the times where the couple (Irish/Taylor) were "separated", she was "working" with CPS. Most likely she has waffled back and forth, and the CPS people were frustrated at not getting their way.

For those who somehow missed it, here is a partial transcription from the video:

6. Ms. Taylor again reported to CPS's <illegible> on August 24, 2009, that she had been hurt during a physical altercation with Mr. Irish and had left him. Ms. Taylor declined to give specifics about the assault. Another safety plan was devised with Ms. Taylor in which her parents were involved. On that same date, Ms. Taylor reported that she was fearful for her safety as Mr. Irish was in possession of a handgun that Ms. Taylor had purchased for him....

 

[tropicangela]

OK, so has anyone read the actual number 6 that comes before the number 7 on the document (that mentions the Oathkeepers) in the video? Mr. Irish holds it up to the camera. It appears that Ms. Taylor has "utilized" CPS at times in the past. Not that this justifies taking the baby, but it does show that there is a history here, and at the times where the couple (Irish/Taylor) were "separated", she was "working" with CPS. Most likely she has waffled back and forth, and the CPS people were frustrated at not getting their way.

For those who somehow missed it, here is a partial transcription from the video:

Was the couple referred to Irish/Taylor, or Taylor and her "ex" husband?

 

[Brian4Liberty]

Was the couple referred to Irish/Taylor, or Taylor and her "ex" husband?

See below:

6. Ms. Taylor again reported to CPS's <illegible> on August 24, 2009, that she had been hurt during a physical altercation with Mr. Irish and had left him. Ms. Taylor declined to give specifics about the assault. Another safety plan was devised with Ms. Taylor in which her parents were involved. On that same date, Ms. Taylor reported that she was fearful for her safety as Mr. Irish was in possession of a handgun that Ms. Taylor had purchased for him....

 

[tropicangela]

See below:

I thought the boys were children of her ex husband and the abuse issues had to do with him. That date is 2009, around the time the boys were removed? A timeline would help.

 

[pcosmar]

For those who somehow missed it, here is a partial transcription from the video:

Didn't miss it.
I ignore it. It is a baseless allegation at this point. I give very little credibility to these state agencies that have a documented history of lies and corruption.

However I did hear her say that John Irish never abused her and never hit her.

Now weighing the credibility of these statements I will have to go with the word of the victim.

 

[pcosmar]

I thought the boys were children of her ex husband and the abuse issues had to do with him. That date is 2009, around the time the boys were removed? A timeline would help.

That has been my understanding, and that her involvement with the system began at that time.

 

[sratiug]

Nothing about any of this has shown any reason for taking a newborn from her mother. They can't keep Irish away from his baby so they take the baby from the mother too??? Absolute and total fascist bullshit.

 

[specsaregood]

He didn't make any claim of being an Oathkeeper. The State did. And that question is between the OathKeepers and the State.

We don't know that, as we still don't know how the state came to believe that he was a member.

 

[pcosmar]

Relevant Information.

YouTube - CPS crimes against children

This is SOP nation wide.

 

[pcosmar]

We don't know that, as we still don't know how the state came to believe that he was a member.

He was a Open Carry Activist. A liberty activist.

 

[specsaregood]

He was a Open Carry Activist. A liberty activist.

I don't see how that has anything to do with what I said. But good on him.

 

[Brian4Liberty]

Didn't miss it.
I ignore it. It is a baseless allegation at this point. I give very little credibility to these state agencies that have a documented history of lies and corruption.

However I did hear her say that John Irish never abused her and never hit her.

Now weighing the credibility of these statements I will have to go with the word of the victim.

Maybe Jerry Springer will come in and do lie-detector tests on everyone involved. While he's at it, he can do DNA tests and find out who cheated on who.

Seriously, the standard liberty position applies: the government should stay out of these things. People lying and changing their stories is common in troubled relationships. No need to add a government agency to the mix, where power corrupts, busy-bodies are empowered, and lawyers and liabilities are more important than the children. And all at taxpayer expense...

 

[sratiug]

We don't know that, as we still don't know how the state came to believe that he was a member.

Why would we care?