Warning: Free Speech Under Attack

post by Pamela Geller Atlas Shrugs Congressman John Culberson hat tip David

Why wouldn't Democrats want the American people, the folks, to see them at work in Washington. This is an affront to every tenet of AN American government by the people, for the people .... yes, yes the little people.
This is works in tandem with the Democrat's venal Fairness Doctrine that seeks to shut down the few outlets right of center voices have to express their views. No radio station owner is going to run content that no one ants to hear (see Air America for the abject failure of liberal talk radio. Owners will switch formats. Business in business to make money. hello. ) Liberal fascism.

Today House Republican Leader John Boehner issued a statement indicating that Democrats are seeking to quash the right of Members of Congress to have free speech. According to the statement, the Democrats are looking at restricting Member content on websites outside the house.gov domain. Congressman Culberson is quickly becoming a "real time representative" by posting on Twitter.com, where he sends regular updates from the House floor and the halls of Congress, and on Qik.com, where he films and posts video updates on the Internet. This new technology allows him to bypass the mainstream media and shine sunlight into the darkest corners of Congress. If the Democrats strong-arm this rule, he would no longer be able to use these websites and our fundamental right to free speech will be taken away.

The following is Mr. Boehner's statement:

I’m writing to alert you to an attack on free speech that is making its way through Congress. This attack, which should concern activists of all political affiliations across the ideological spectrum, comes in the form of a new congressional rule that would prohibit Americans from viewing content published by Members of Congress on websites that are not “approved” by the Committee on House Administration, the panel that creates rules governing the internal operations of the U.S. House.

Millions of Americans today utilize free, unregulated and uncensored websites like YouTube on a daily basis to not only obtain information from their elected leaders about what’s going on in their government, but to also give feedback and easily share that information with others. The advent of new media technology has empowered American citizens with real-time information about the policy debates and actions being undertaken by Congress. This has increasingly forced Congress to become more transparent and made it easier for American citizens to hold their elected leaders accountable.

The Committee on House Administration is considering a new rule that could bring this trend to a screeching halt. The Committee is considering the adoption of new rules that would require outside websites such as YouTube to comply with House regulations before Members of Congress could post videos on them. Under the proposal, the House Administration Committee would develop a list of “approved” websites, and Members of Congress could post content only such websites.

If the proposed rule is adopted, the free flow of information over the Internet between Americans and their representatives will be significantly curtailed. Americans who currently use free websites like YouTube to obtain uncensored daily information about congressional policy debates will instead be forced to go to websites “approved” by the House Administration Committee in order to continue getting such information. This would amount to new government censorship of the Internet, by a panel of federal officials that is neither neutral nor independent.

House Republicans, led by Reps. Vern Ehlers (R-MI), Kevin McCarthy (R-CA), and Tom Price (R-GA), have expressed their opposition to this attack on Internet freedom and proposed an alternative solution that would allow Members of Congress to continue posting content at sites of their choosing. I will continue to keep you updated as this situation unfolds.

http://www.culberson.house.gov/news.aspx?A=441

Please contact U.S. Congressman from Texas John Culverson and let him know you support his efforts to keep us free and safe here=>>http://culberson.house.gov/contactinfo.aspx

Contact other Senators from your state and let them know you are against muzzling free speech : The Power of One : Make Your Voices Heard
The automated letter writer that is used by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce , it composes your letters in a professional format, addresses your letter, and then you write the body of the letter and it then fills in your return address, pertinent information, and then gives you the choice to print a hard copy or email to recipient.

Judge: Bloggers Entitled to Immunity Under Communications Act

Shannon P. DuffyThe Legal Intelligencer

Bloggers cannot be hit with libel suits on the basis of anonymous postings on their Web sites because federal law grants them immunity by explicitly stating that they cannot be treated as the "publisher" of such comments, a federal judge has ruled.

New Front on Bloggers

Harry’s Place, a UK blog dedicated to promoting the ideals of freedom and democracy, is being sued by Mohammed Sawalha, the President of the British Muslim Initiative, which has been linked to Hamas and the Islamic Brotherhood, both terrorist organizations. The blog reports that Mr. Sawalha, according to the BBC…

“master minded much of Hamas’ political and military strategy” and in London “is alleged to have directed funds, both for Hamas’ armed wing, and for spreading its missionary dawah”.

In their revelation of the impending lawsuit against them leveled by Mohammed Sawalha, they write:

Mr Sawalha claims that we have “chosen a malevolent interpretation of a meaningless word”. In fact, we did no more than translate a phrase which appeared in an Al Jazeera report of Mr Sawalha’s speech. When Al Jazeera changed that phrase from “Evil Jew” to “Jewish Lobby”, we reported that fact, along with the statement that it had been a typographical error.

…Mr Sawalha says that the attribution of the phrase “Evil Jew” to him implies that he is “anti-semitic and hateful”. Notably, he does not take issue with our reporting of the revelation, made in a Panorama documentary in 2006, that he is a senior activist in the clerical fascist terrorist organisation, Hamas.

It looks like Harry’s Place is going up against some pretty top-notch lawyers on this one, and they’ve got guts, but as the post goes on to say:

If Mr Sawalha persists in attempting to silence us with this desperate legal suit, we will need your help.

We won’t be able to stand up to them alone.

This is why we’ve started this blogburst, to get the word out that we won’t let members of Hamas or any radical terrorist group censor us or any of our fellow bloggers.

If you’d like to add your site to the blogroll, simply email us at admin@neoconstant.com, and include your site’s URL.

Then copy and paste this entry into one of your posts. Future posts will be emailed to you. Thanks, and don’t forget to head over to Harry’s Place to show your support of their freedom of speech!

"Liberty, If it means anything , it is the right to tell people what they don't want to hear"

Some Police Departments Now Administering Drugs

For at least two years, the Nashville PD have been recklessly endangering citizens by using emergency medical personnel to forcibly inject Versed -- a powerful prescription medication with side effects including agitation and confusion -- into agitated, confused people. This potentially lethal stupidity is what we can expect when people who go to work with guns on their belt decide to play "doctor".

For almost two years, Metro police have had the option of calling for a needle loaded with a strong sedative to control the most unruly people they encounter on the street.

The Nashville cops try and justify setting themselves to forcibly administer powerful mind-altering drugs without judicial order (much less consent) by trundling out a local Emergency Services doc who tries to excuse away this insane practice by citing a diagnosis that doesn't even exist: "excited delirium".

Read it all here=>>

Predatory Practices and Places

Where the Looters and the Poachers Stalk Prey: Guarding Your Estate in the 21st Century by Lou Ann Anderson

www.EstateofDenial.com“The ‘Greatest Generation’ is the greatest generation to exploit.” This quote by Chayo Reyes, a retired LAPD Specialist in Elder Fraud, from a new DVD entitled Saving Our Parents appropriately depicts increasing yet often unreported activities targeting today’s elderly and their families. The assets of older Americans are being looted via actions in which probate instruments such as powers of attorney, wills, trusts or guardianships are used to gain control of property. These actions evolve into an Involuntary Redistribution of Assets (IRA) as ultimate financial resource distribution becomes contrary to the asset owner’s intentions.

Family members are sometimes IRA perpetrators, but non-family individuals can come into an older person’s life with equally damaging results. It can be a pre-meditated effort or an “opportunity knocks” act. And don’t ever think the elderly don’t exploit each other! A senior woman with no money, an inflated sense of entitlement and a life expectancy of another 10+ years can easily become a financial predator. The exploited elderly person may not understand (or live to see) the actual IRA action instead leaving honest, responsible people in the target’s life to deal with the aftermath and even become secondary targets – especially if they are heirs/beneficiaries for whom assets are rightfully designated and/or are obstacles to an IRA practitioner’s ultimate success. Expensive, prolonged legal entanglements as well as intimidation and harassment are common tools used to pressure heirs/beneficiaries to cede rights of inheritance if outright looting is not easily accomplishable.

Because the pool of those willing to exploit the elderly is endless, it is important to be aware of places and venues where today’s predators search for potential victims. The list might be surprising, but remember: the guise of community respectability, professional credibility, even enhanced morality or religiosity can be important entry points into the life of a predator’s next mark. With that, here is our list of where the looters and the poachers stalk prey:

*Senior centers
*Government-sponsored lectures (especially through departments/agencies specializing in eldercare, aging)
*Civic groups (Kiwanis, Rotary, etc.)
*Churches, synagogues
*Retirement communities, homeowners’ associations
*Support groups (church-sponsored and otherwise)
*Medical facilities, nursing homes, assisted living facilities
*Estate planning seminars, sales presentations (beware “free food” ploys)
*Consultations with “professionals” (lawyers, caregivers, accountants, social workers, etc.)
*Any places that cater to an older clientele (gyms, dance clubs, libraries, restaurants, etc.)

Anecdotal evidence tells of probate judges attending meetings at senior centers and other community venues ostensibly providing seniors with “prepare now for future needs” information. A forum apparently frequented by individuals with Connecticut probate experience depicts a system in which public officials troll for prospective cases to meet the challenge of operating in a state with numerous probate courts constantly vying for justification of their court’s existence. And though Connecticut residents may experience more visible aggression in these pursuits, similar reports are heard across the country.

Meetings sponsored by anyone - government agencies, churches, civic groups, support groups, whoever – can be beneficial for those looking to poach property of the unsuspecting. An IRA practitioner might be the featured speaker or he/she might be in the audience looking to “befriend” unsuspecting marks. Gatherings put on by seemingly respectable organizations can be viewed as safe havens fostering greater trust and openness to those with whom personal contact is made – a point well known to poachers-on-the-prowl. Support groups can be especially rich in potential targets as the group’s commonality (grief, caregivers, divorce, etc.) may increase their emotionalism and vulnerability – another point not lost on IRA stalkers.

A 2005 Los Angeles Times series entitled Guardians for Profit said “Conservators find clients by sponsoring breakfasts at senior centers and networking at legal luncheons. Nursing homes call when residents become too addled to pay the rent, wanting a conservator to write checks for them. Hospitals call when patients have outlasted their insurance, hoping that a conservator will move them somewhere else.” Conservators, also known as guardians, use probate procedures to gain control over an individual’s personal liberty and property. Though the Times articles focus on California, these cases are not uncommon elsewhere.

Stories regarding Involuntary Redistribution of Assets (IRA) cases within Florida’s probate system were detailed by the St. Petersburg Times in a 1994 Pulitzer prize-winning series called Final Indignities. And though published nearly 15 years ago, the same stories are heard today – from Florida and most every other state.

IRA predators are a fact of today’s life. Due to the wealth transfer getting ready to occur in the next 20 or so years, Involuntary Redistribution of Assets actions will likely skyrocket. People think proper estate planning will protect them – wrong! People think they don’t have enough assets to be a target – wrong!! There is no inoculation from the threat of IRA. There is no avoidance of being a potential target. This information is not offered as a broad-based indictment of all organizations and entities, but awareness should exist on the part of those hosting and attending community events. Knowledge of today’s predatory landscape and recognition of the places haunted by asset looters and property poachers will provide an upper hand. And as forewarned is forearmed - stay alert!

Lou Ann Anderson is producer of The Lynn Woolley Show, a Texas-based talk radio program. She also is an advocate working to create awareness regarding the Texas probate system and its surrounding culture. Lou Ann may be contacted at info@EstateofDenial.com.

Grave Robber Exposed!

by Estate of Denial.Com

Longtime attorney pleads guilty to estate thefts Terry Stork faces up to life in prisonTony Plohetski (tplohetski@statesman.com) June 28, 2008Austin American-Statesman http://www.statesman.com/news/content/news/stories/local/06/28/0628stork.htmlA longtime Austin attorney pleaded guilty Friday to stealing from the estates of three elderly women that he was in charge of overseeing after their deaths.

Terry Erwin Stork, 69, will be sentenced Aug. 13 on three felony theft charges. He faces up to life in prison on two of the charges and up to 20 years behind bars on the third.

He surrendered his law license to the State Bar of Texas last year.
Stork’s attorney, Joe James Sawyer, could not be reached for comment Friday afternoon.

Travis County Assistant District Attorney Patty Robertson declined to comment until the case is completed.

According to arrest affidavits and lawsuits filed in Austin courts, Stork systematically mismanaged or stole from the three estates worth more than $800,000 over two decades. Each time, an elderly woman with no living children had chosen him to divide her belongings among organizations and loved ones.

The records said Stork lived in the home of a deceased client from 1987 to 2002 and deposited money from the sale of the home into his own bank account.

In another case, according to records, he let the home of a client sit empty, drove the woman’s Buick LeSabre to disrepair and used her money to add to his rare china collection.

He was also accused of failing to pass along inheritances to people and organizations that were supposed to get them.

The American-Statesman reported on allegations against Stork in a December 2006 story about estate theft and how Texas probate laws often cannot guarantee that people’s belongings reach their family members or friends after they die.

Ohio Judge Disbarred

Thanks to Tom Fields for sending us information about the disbarment of Judge Jeffrey Hoskins by the Supreme Court of Ohio. See link.

While The Columbus Dispatch’s article only details Hoskins’ illicit activities with regard to David K. Bliss, a man described as a “veteran grifter,” Estate of Denial finds the Supreme Court’s Opinion Summary of interest as it reads in part:

“…With regard to the offenses alleged during his years in private practice, the Court adopted the board’s findings that Hoskins engaged in a pattern of misconduct involving fraud, deceit, dishonesty or misrepresentation and committed other ethical offenses by repeatedly making improper and unauthorized withdrawals of money for his own use from the estates of several relatives over whose assets he exercised fiduciary control as executor or administrator. The board also found that Hoskins failed to timely disburse estate assets to the rightful beneficiaries, failed to keep required records accounting for his withdrawals and disbursements from the estates, charged excessive legal fees, and filed incomplete, inaccurate and misleading reports with the probate court that concealed his improper diversion of funds from the estates to his own use…”

With this characterization, Mr. Hoskins becomes another Involuntary Redistribution of Assets (IRA) practitioner, another grave robber. It’s interesting that our last three EoD updates have involved documentable misconduct or questionable acts on the part of lawyers and/or judges. Anyone see a pattern?

Estate of Denial has long advocated that any probate reform must include strengthening consequences for judicial and attorney misconduct. In fact, we support the potential for criminal prosecutions. The corrupt culture surrounding our probate systems are as problematic as some specific laws (or lack of). This area is critical and must be a component of any effective reform efforts.

Dealings between judge, con end in disbarment

ADA and Court Sanctioned Elder Abuse

Back in 1993/94 when I was working with a group of congenitally blind men and women who were part of my dissertation research group, I came to know a wonderfully intelligent woman who had been born blind and used a guide dog as her vehicle for independence in a sighted world. She loved to travel to Hawaii to go surfing, but was saddened that Hawaii's strict quarantine laws prevented her from bringing her guide dog to Oahu. Before long, however, a group representing the blind sued Hawaii under the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 and forced the State to permit visually-disabled persons to travel to Hawaii with their guide dogs.

And so I am wondering if there might be a way to use the ADA to force States to stop imposing draconian conservatorships and guardianships over persons who are alleged by petitioners to be disabled and then determined to be disabled by the Court (see the ADA's definition of "disabled" below in section (2)). Could this be a way to stop the madness? Could application of the Americans with Disabilities Act permit Federal oversight that would protect the civil due process rights and Constitutional rights of the senior men and women whose lives are being destroyed by these proceedings--this court-sanctioned elder abuse?
In researching the ADA of 1990, I find that:

(1) The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) gives federal civil rights protections to individuals with disabilities similar to those provided to individuals on the basis of race, color, sex, national origin, age, and religion. It guarantees equal opportunity for individuals with disabilities in public
accommodations, employment, transportation, State and local government services, and telecommunications.

(2) A person is considered "disabled" if he/she has a physical or mental impairment substantially limiting a major life activity; or he/she has a record of disability; or he/she is regarded as having a disability. An individual is considered to have a "disability" if he or she has a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities, has a record of such an impairment, or is regarded as having such an impairment.

Let me give an example of the work being done in one State-Kansas-to work on Disability Concerns:

The Kansas Commission on Disability Concerns (KCDC) is an office within the Kansas Department of Human Resources. As established by statute, KCDC is empowered to:

**Carry on a continuing program to promote a higher quality of life for people with disabilities.

**Cooperate with all public and private agencies interested in the rehabilitation and employment of people with disabilities.
**Encourage the organization of community-based programs and work closely with such programs in promoting independence of people with disabilities.

**Assist in developing societal acceptance of people with disabilities.
**Inform individuals with disabilities of specific facilities available for increasing their independence.

When a conservatorship or guardianship is imposed upon a given individual, that man or woman loses almost every right an adult possesses and is, in effect, reduced to the legal status of an unemancipated child. Why can we not figure out a way to use the Americans with Disabilities Act to make this impossible? If a man or woman is determined to be "incapacitated" or "incompetent" in a court of law, is this not an adjudication of a disability, that "he or she has a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities, has a record of such an impairment, or is regarded as having such an impairment"? What else could the ruling be but a statement of disability? Then why can we not try to use the ADA of 1990 to eliminate conservatorships and guardianships entirely and focus on promoting independence for these people with identified disabilities?

Is this not possible? You all know I am a Clinical Psychologist rather than an attorney, but this has been niggling away at me for a long long time. I am of the belief that what is being done now-below the public's radar-to successfully aging men and women in our State conservatorship/guardianship courts is criminal.

I look forward to a vigorous discussion of the possibility that simply ruling a person to be disabled in court this way might somehow invoke the civil and constitutional protections mandated in our country's Americans with Disabilities Act.

With hope,

Diane G. Armstrong, Ph.D.
http://www.retirementnightmare.com/

Manire Family: Thinking of You

by Estate of Denial.Com

Our thoughts and prayers go out to the Manire family upon the death of J.P. Manire. It is notable that one attorney/guardian showed the family a degree of consideration during J.P.’s last days. This is no way, however, excuses Denton County, Texas, officials and their appointees’ intrusion into the lives of J.P. and Doris Manire - an intrusion that led to the Manires’ loss of basic liberty and all their property rights. Despite J.P.’s death, the harm caused will continue as J.P.’s children and grandchildren live with the consequences of this Involuntary Redistribution of Assets (IRA) act while a host of attorneys and other “guardians” enjoy the benefit of financial assets hijacked from the heirs of J.P. and Doris Manire. As unresolved matters exist with this case, our coverage will also continue.

We recently had the opportunity to visit Independence Hall in Philadelphia. This building was a key meeting place for our Founding Fathers as they worked to establish a governmental system palatable to all involved. This is where both the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution were signed. Being in a room full of so much history and recognizing the harsh conditions under which courageous men came together to express their convictions and to stand against a tyrannical government was a moving experience.

As we follow the growing number of IRA cases which violate the liberty and property rights of honest Americans, one has to recognize that self-serving government and its circle of allies (in many cases, attorneys or other “friends of the court”) are active today as they were in 1776 using positions of influence to enrich themselves by feeding upon the efforts of others. Perhaps it’s time that those of us with IRA experiences prepare our own updated version of the Declaration of Independence. Although the Declaration is dated July 4, 1776, it actually wasn’t signed until August 2 (http://www.archives.gov/press/press-releases/2005/nr05-83.html?template=print). Maybe this August 2, we’ll make available a new document for distribution to the asset looters, property poachers and those who aid and abet their efforts.

How to Turn a Free People into Slaves

by Stephen Baskerville

Using instruments of public criminal justice to punish private hurts turns the family into government-occupied territory.

Today, it is becoming equally commonplace that this spirit of liberty is leaving Americans, that we are becoming “a nation of sheep,” as Judge Andrew Napolitano puts it in a new book, who acquiesce in the progressive abrogation of our Constitution and liberty.

The moment either spouse files for divorce, even if the other is legally unimpeachable, the government takes control of the children, who become effectively wards of the state. Unauthorized contact by a parent becomes a crime, and the excluded parent can be arrested and incarcerated without trial through a variety of other means that by-pass constitutional due process protections: domestic violence accusations, child abuse accusations, inability to pay “child support,” even inability to pay attorneys’ fees.

Legal jargon and clichés like “divorce,” “custody battle,” and “child support” have led Americans to acquiesce in this massive intrusion of state power over their freedom. We don’t say that the government arbitrarily took away someone’s children; we say he “lost custody.” We don’t say a legally innocent citizen was interrogated by government agents over how he lives his private life; we say there was a “custody battle.” We don’t say a citizen was incarcerated without trial or charge for debt he could not possibly pay and did nothing to incur; we say he “didn’t pay his child support.” These clichés and jargon inure us to tyranny.

Using instruments of public criminal justice to punish private hurts turns the family into government-occupied territory. The children experience family life not as a place of love, cooperation, compromise, trust, and forgiveness. Instead they receive a firsthand lesson in tyranny...

Something similar may be seen today in the children of the divorce regime. No people can remain free who harbor within themselves a system of dictatorship or raise their children according to its principles.

Please Read the entire article by Stephen Bakerville sbaskerville@cox.net here=>>

Is the United States Turning Into a Fascist Country?

posted by Erik @ 10:12

The question above is one we would normally associate with a liberal column (or hysterics) and dismiss with a sigh or a smirk. It is therefore with profound sadness that I confess that the title is mine, with no irony intended.

Indeed, if I were not of the optimistic type, I would have titled this post Has America (Already) Turned Into a Fascist State? Like many conservatives, I assume, I have been more of the optimistic type, thinking that conservatives lovers of liberty were winning the battle of ideas against the liberals statists, or at least doing a pretty good job of holding their own.

It is therefore highly distressing to discover a book that not only says that conservatives are losing — scratch that; that Americans and lovers of liberty are losing the war but that they have hardly been aware of the main battle in the first place, which has swept by under their (under our) noses.

In that respect, I call upon Stephen Baskerville's Taken Into Custody (The War Against Fathers, Marriage, and the Family) which I have been reading for the past couple of weeks, during which time I have been feeling ever more down, pessimistic, depressed, all the while trying not to "tremble for my nation". Just read what Baskerville reports from the trenches (emphasis in bold mine):

Fathers trying to see their children following unproven accusations is described as "further violence" and the "threat of kidnapping"; simply responding to court proceedings is described as "violence."

This is not violence; it is fathers trying to recover their children through the same legal process by which their children were removed and which, in most cases, they themselves did not initiate.…What we confront here is a bureaucratic machine of a kind that has never before been seen in the United States or the other English-speaking democracies. … The implications reach far beyond fathers and even beyond the family itself, for forcibly severing the intimate bond between parents and their children threatens the liberties of all of us. "The right to one's own children … is perhaps the most basic individual right," writes Susan Shell, "so basic we hardly think of it."

By establishing a private sphere of life from which the state is excluded, family bonds also serve as the foundation of a free society. "No known society treats the question of who may properly call a child his or her own as simply … a matter to be decided entirely politically as one might distribute land or wealth," Shell continues.

But it is important to understand that "custody" is not the right to parent one's children; it is the power to prevent someone else from parenting his children and to marshal the penal apparatus — courts, police, and jails — to ensure he stays away from them. [Similarly, it would be more correct to speak of plundered pops than deadbeat dads.

…In the jargon of family law, faithfully parroted by the media and academia, this father has "lost custody," a simple and harmless enough sounding formulation of events, so common as to be mundane. But this jargon disguises far-reaching implications. In plain English, this father's unauthorized association with his own children is now a crime.

…the media will go to any lengths to avoid admitting that we are in a massive epidemic of government-sponsored child stealing

…The growth of this machinery has been accompanied by a huge propaganda campaign that has served to justify punitive measures against citizens who are not convicted of any crime.

… "The overwhelming majority of so-called 'dead-beat dads' are just judicially created," says [an] attorney. "Why all this talk about so-called 'deadbeat dads'? Because there is a lot of money to be made through that myth."

What is taking place here should be made very clear: Citizens who are completely innocent of any legal wrongdoing and simply minding their own business — not seeking any litigation and neither convicted nor accused of any legal infraction, criminal or civil — are ordered into court and told to write checks to officials of the court or they will be summarily arrested and jailed. Judges also order citizens to sell their houses and other property and turn proceeds over to lawyers and other cronies they never hired.

Summoning legally unimpeachable citizens to court and forcing them to empty their bank accounts to people they have neither hired for services they have requested nor received on threat of physical punishment is what most people would call a protection racket. Were any other public officials to use their position of public trust to coerce money out of private citizens, they would likely face indictment. Yet family court judges do this as a matter of routine. This is by far the clearest example I have ever encountered in my professional research of what we political scientists term a "kleptocracy," or government by thieves.

…The regime of involuntary divorce, forcible removal of children, coerced child support, and knowingly false accusations is now warping our entire legal system, undermining and overturning principles of common law that have protected individual rights for centuries. The presumption of innocence has been inverted.

Far from simple violations of particular constitutional clauses, these practices and powers are undermining constitutional government in its most fundamental principles. The power to take children from their parents for no reason is arbitrary government at its most intrusive, since it invades and obliterates all of private life. Yet we have created a governmental machinery that exists for no other purpose.

Men who are truly intent on abandoning their progeny have little difficulty in disappearing; it is fathers who want to see their children who allow themselves to be snared. This may reveal the cruelest and most cynical side of the child-support machine: its willingness to use a father's love for his children to plunder and destroy him.…

…Do these questions matter? Yes, they do matter, because in these questions lies the difference between a father who is pursued because he has abandoned his children and a father who is pursued because he refuses to abandon his children. Courts exist to dispense justice against those who violate the law or agreements. When they abandon this role to become a "social service delivery system" it is much more likely that the justice and penal systems will be perverted to persecute the innocent.

Anti-Military Lawyer Damages Marine's Car on Eve of Deployment

NOTE: Jay Grodner pled guilty. An important update is posted here.
This ought to make your blood boil. And this Marine should receive a commendation for not kicking the living crap out of the guy...seriously.

-------------------------------------
Elder Abuse Salutes the men and women in uniform because without their sacrifices we would not enjoy our most valuable possession , the freedom to speak freely and to expose corruption and speak out against injustices, whenever and wherever we see them.

Elder Abuse Salutes the Men and Women at BlackFive.Net