Cops have a secret, unaccountable system for tracking you by your cellphone, and they abuse it like crazy


MFP Commentary:
THis is why I have a radio blocking cell phone case and a phone that lets me take out the battery
~MFP



Securus Technologies markets a product to law enforcement that taps into realtime cell-tower data from mobile carriers to produce fine-grained location tracking of anyone carrying a phone; it is nominally marketed to find parolees and wandering https://boingboing.net/2018/05/12/extraordinary-access.htmAlzheimer’s patients, but because it has no checks or balances, cops can query it willy-nilly to find anyone’s location.

That’s what, Cory Hutcheson, ex-Sheriff of Mississippi County, MO, is accused of doing; prosecutors say that for three years, Hutcheson abused Securus’s system to track all kinds of people — even a local judge — without a warrant.

Securus claims that it restricts the use of its system to legally permitted surveillance, requiring users to upload warrants or court orders prior to use; but it does not vet or review those orders before granting access. Securus also does not make the alleged court orders visible to carriers before it queries their databases, meaning that the phone companies have to take Securus’s word for it.

The carriers, meanwhile, are exploiting a loophole in privacy laws that nominally prohibit selling this kind of data: by burying “consent” to the sale of your location data in their lengthy, never-read agreements, the carriers are able to circumvent the law; primarily to sell your data to marketers, but also to surveillance companies like Securus……  Read More

Former Kansas Gubernatorial Candidate Becomes Warrior Fighting Against State-Sponsored Child Kidnapping


MFP Commentary:
Looks to me like both our churches and our governments are run by pedophiles….
~MFP



 

 

Commentary by Terri LaPoint
Health Impact News

There are things in life that happen that change you. There are things that, once you see, you cannot un-see.

Throughout history, there have been individuals who rise up against the evil that confronts their society, who become a voice for their generation who say, “No more! This wickedness must end, and I will not stop until it does.”

These voices lead by example and inspire those around them to stand strong and never give up, no matter how intimidating the battle may be.

Jennifer Winn is such a voice for families fighting against the evils of medical and state-sponsored kidnapping of children. She has become known for her fiery passion, uncompromising quest for justice, and inspirational speeches that call governmental officials and agencies out on the carpet for the injustice they inflict on the people they are supposed to serve.

It was not until shortly after her run for governor of the state of Kansas in 2014 that she learned that Child Protective Services (CPS) and family courts were taking children away from non-abusive parents, often putting them into horrific foster care situations. Once she recognized what was happening to thousands of families, she refused to be silent.

She immediately began speaking up for families and speaking out against the corruption that she found in the CPS system.

Jennifer Winn joined Connie Reguli and others on September 11, 2018, as part of a team of activists and professionals who gathered in Washington DC to participate in an Educational Panel put together by 4 the Children USA. The event was live-streamed to hundreds of thousands of viewers, including District Attorneys’ offices from several states according to event founder Robert Slaven.

See Connie Reguli’s speech here:

The Ease with which Government Kidnaps Children – A Review of Current Legislation and the Multi-Billion Dollar Child “Protection” Industry

Various speakers educated the audience regarding law, medical practices, and legislation. Some shared personal stories of first-hand encounters with corruption within the system.

Jennifer Winn has no such story of having her own family members taken by CPS. However, she is a mother, a grandmother, an American, and a human being, all of which means to her that she must stand and fight for those who are being torn apart by injustice:… Read More

Why Nobody Trusts the FBI… And That’s a Good Thing


MFP Commentary:
Please take the time to read what the animals on a  “FBI hit  team” did to an American citizen.  Read this on an empty stomach.
The Uncensored
Gordon Kahl Story
~MFP



By Joe Jarvis
The Daily Bell

October 6, 2018

When the FBI came out with a report on Hillary Clinton weeks before the 2016 election, Democrats were livid.

But so were Republicans… The report said that even though she had committed a crime by negligently using a personal computer for state business, she would not be charged.

Democrats later cheered the FBI as the Mueller Probe began investigating Trump. Investigations are the same thing as a guilty verdict, right?

And Republicans fumed when it surfaced that two agents exchanged anti-Trump text messages. They even discussed ways to subvert the presidential election and choose the winner!

And now Democrats are back to accusing the FBI of being a partisan tool used by whoever is in power. That’s because an FBI investigation could not prove a 36-year-old sexual assault accusation true.

Clearly, no one feels super confident in the FBI. And of course, we shouldn’t. They’re sketchy as all hell.

J. Edgar Hoover set the tone when, as Director of the FBI, he compiled a list of disloyal Americans. He’s famous for his enemies lists, in fact. But you didn’t have to break any laws to be considered an enemy…

Let’s not forget that the FBI murdered Vicki Weaver at Ruby Ridge. And they probably assassinated Martin Luther King Jr.–they definitely blackmailed him and encouraged him to kill himself.

More recently the FBI spent three years covering up evidence that they sent snipers to surround Bundy Ranch. They conspired with the Bureau of Land Management to suppress evidence favorable to the Bundy’s.

The FBI also performs warrantless searches of computers using paid informants on The Geek Squad.

And the FBI received at least two tips about the Parkland Shooter in the months before the shooting…Read More

Why Nobody Trusts the FBI… and that’s a good thing

Empire of Lies: Are ‘We the People’ Useful Idiots in the Digital Age?

John Whitehead’s Commentary


Empire of Lies: Are ‘We the People’ Useful Idiots in the Digital Age?

Federal Funding Provides Incentives for States to Take Children Away from Families Even When No Abuse is Present

by Terri LaPoint
Health Impact News

When Child Protective Services (CPS) takes children from a loving, non-abusive family, the parents, and sometimes grandparents, aunts, and uncles, often seek out information about what is happening. Many gravitate toward groups on social media that provide education and support for those fighting CPS for their children.

As the confused parents try to sort out the information and learn how to get their children back, one question dominates their search: How can this happen in America?

It isn’t long before they will hear of ASFA – the Clintons’ Adoption and Safe Families Act of 1997, which provides billions of federal dollars to states to place children in foster care and adopt them out to strangers. Parents quickly learn that ASFA is one of the most destructive pieces of legislation to ever impact American families. Activists and parents alike are calling for it to be abolished.

However, before there was ASFA, there was CAPTA. The Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act of 1974, or “The Mondale Act,” doesn’t receive nearly the attention that ASFA does, yet it is the piece of legislation that established Child Protective Services in all 50 states.

It remains in existence today. It has to be reauthorized periodically. Since its passage, it has been re-approved every 4 to 6 years, with new amendments added each time.

Richard Wexler, the executive director of the National Coalition for Child Protection Reform, calls CAPTA “the one-stop shop for bad ideas.” In a recent article called, “CAPTA Law Codifies Everything Wrong With How We ‘Fight’ Child Abuse,” Wexler writes:

….Read More

My Name Is Not “Respondent Mother”: The Need for Judicial Reform in Child Welfare


MFP Commentary:
Reform?  If anything the criminals that have implemented this atrocity to our rights and to our children’s physical and mental health should be tried and dealt with for the same reasons that we tried the Nazi guards at Auschwitz prison camp.

“Reform” would still mean that you get a jury trial for littering, but not  if the state wants to kidnap your children. I vote on jail and even the death sentence for people that kidnap children, even if they work for the state under color of law.   If you are interested  there is a  Federal “Law”  that could be applied:   USC Title 18 sections 241 & 242   Not that we need this law.  There was no such law that permitted us to have the Nuremberg trials and hang Nazi war criminals. This kidnapping of our children and their resultant sexual, physical abuse, and even their  deaths  at the hands of the state is a very similar situation IMHO and deserves a similar response.

~MFP



 

 

Commentary by Terri LaPoint
Health Impact News

Losing a child for any reason is one of the most devastating things that can ever happen to a parent. The process of dealing with Child Protective Services and family court, while never easy, often serves to dehumanize parents and children. Instead of serving to help families overcome challenges, the system creates further harm when it treats parents as though they are worthless.

Not only are civil and constitutional rights violated routinely, but many parents find that the system seeks to strip them of their basic human dignity.

Law professor Vivek Sankaran recognizes that the treatment of parents by the courts is counterproductive to goals of restoring the family and helping the children.

Sankaran wrote a piece for the American Bar Association addressing these concerns, with suggestions that could be implemented by the courts when dealing with parents facing allegations by CPS.

I would add a couple more suggestions:

  • Require actual evidence before accusing a parent or taking their children.
  • Ensure that social workers, doctors, police, attorneys, and judges follow the law… Read More

 

Babies for Cash – How the State Abuses Infants by Destroying the Mother-Child Bond in CPS Abductions

by Terri LaPoint
Health Impact News

A baby’s first year is crucial to a baby’s emotional and cognitive development. It is in the earliest months of life that the foundations for basic trust, security, and relationships are laid. The parent-child relationship is the environment in which that is designed to happen.

Yet the majority of children who enter foster care are taken within their first year of life, depriving them of critical bonding time and causing permanent trauma and damage to the babies’ ability to trust. More children in this age group are not returned home and are later adopted out than any other age group.

Human babies are born with an innate emotional and psychological need for their biological parents. When the child cannot or does not receive the love and acceptance of their own mother and father, he or she is left with a gaping hole deep inside that they may struggle the rest of their lives to fill even if they are loved, wanted, and cherished by a substitute parent.

The rationale behind the existence of Child Protective Services is that the state works for “the best interest of the child,” removing children from homes that the state decides are not good for the child.

Social workers and judges alike argue that they would rather be “on the safe side” and “err on the side of the child” by removing children to prevent the chance of them being harmed by their family. Countless social worker court reports of families whose stories we have covered contain references to the “possibility of future harm” without any evidence of actual harm having taken place…. Read More

Photos from a few of the stories Health Impact News has reported where infants were medically kidnapped by the state and put into foster care against the wishes of the parents.

 

Vigilantes with a Badge: Warrior Cops Endanger Our Lives and Freedoms

“There are always risks in challenging excessive police power, but the risks of not challenging it are more dangerous, even fatal.”—Hunter S. Thompson, Kingdom of Fear: Loathsome Secrets of a Star-Crossed Child in the Final Days of the American Century

I have known a lot of good cops, I have defended a lot of good cops, and I have been fortunate to call a number of good cops friends.

So when I say that warrior cops—hyped up on their own authority and the power of the badge—have not made America any safer or freer, I am not disrespecting any of the fine, decent, lawful police officers who take seriously their oath of office to serve and protect their fellow citizens, uphold the Constitution, and maintain the peace.

My beef is with the growing squads of warrior cops who have been given the green light to kill, shoot, taser, abuse and steal from American citizens in the so-called name of law and order.

These cops are little more than vigilantes with a badge.

Indeed, it is increasingly evident that militarized police armed with weapons of war who are allowed to operate above the law and break the laws with impunity have not made America any safer or freer.

Don’t take my word for it.

A new study by a political scientist at Princeton University concludes that militarizing police and SWAT teams “provide no detectable benefits in terms of officer safety or violent crime reduction.”

In fact, according to researcher Jonathan Mummolo, if police in America are feeling less safe, it’s because the process of transforming them into extensions of the military makes them less safe, less popular and less trust-worthy…..Read More

My Daughter Molested by TSA; Me Nearly Arrested for Objecting

by :

As I begin writing this, my innocent 13 year old little girl is in tears sitting in the terminal at Reagan International Airport. Somewhere back at the TSA checkpoint there is a middle aged woman who has just, in clear view of law enforcement, committed a sexual crime against her, a minor child. I have it all on film.

I nearly went to jail. The TSA agent continues her crime spree.

Returning from the Ron Paul Institute’s Washington conference, where my family all pitched in to make the event possible, we found ourselves at the Transportation Security Administration checkpoint.

To this point in our occasional travels, my wife had been able to accompany our two young daughters through the metal detector, while my teenaged son and I had been forced to undergo a “pat-down” because we refused to submit to the scanner. All of a sudden this time was different. An aggressive TSA officer barked that my 13 year old girl could not accompany her mother and younger sister through the metal detector, but rather would have to submit to a “pat-down.”

Meanwhile my 10 year old daughter had already been sent through the detector and was far out of our sight on the other side of the machine. That made me anxious, as it would any parent.

They would not allow my wife through to accompany the 10 year old, insisting she had “opted out” and must wait for “female assist.” She had done no such thing. We had no idea where our 10 year old was, no idea where our possessions were, and no one would let my wife through to re-join her. It was obvious retaliation for our refusal to go through their machine.

I strongly objected to the separation of my family. I was told to not raise my voice.

Finally they allowed my wife through the detector to join our 10 year old. Then they ushered my son, my 13 year old daughter, and me to undergo a “pat down.”

I watched in agitation as a woman put on gloves and began to grab my young daughter’s genitals. I yelled at my wife to catch it all on the iPhone and she did….. Read More

My Daughter Molested by TSA; Me Nearly Arrested for Objecting

Why We Can’t Ignore the “Militia” Clause of the Second Amendment


MFP Commentary:
As a long standing member of the state sanctioned  Missouri Militia, I find that just like the general public, militia members, as a rule do not understand the Constitution nor the principles that this country was founded upon.  Ironically many are past members of the one organization that the militia is there to protect us from if necessary:  A standing army as the founders called it. The US military.   None seem to realize this.  Most have a strange infatuation with the US military, and want to emulate it regardless of whether it makes any sense whatsoever for the militia to do so.

They sell the Militia to the public,  and to it’s members as something that it primarily is not!  They sell the milita as “Disaster Relief, State Defense & Community Service”.      I have never heard anyone delve into what they mean by “state defense” because most  don’t even know what it means, and those that  might,  don’t want to go there.  We have a politically correct militia that IMHO is close to useless because they do not even know why they exist, nor understand our founding documents.

Most also do not recognize the other standing army that is in our midst, one that I think the founders would be very alarmed about.  We now have a standing arm of  soldiers  that wear blue uniforms, and proudly proclaim that they are “order followers”.   Just like their brothers at the Auschwitz concentration camp in Nazi Germany.    They will, and brag about it, enforce any “law” that the psychopath in the legislature commit to paper.

We were never meant to have neither standing army.  A free people should not be lorded over by standing armies.   As envisioned by the founders, you and I, the  militia,   are and were “the police”.   And during times of peace we were the only military on the continent. (Spare the Navy which is authorized by the Constitution during times of peace)

Spoiler alert:    This is the heart of the this article IMHO:

In his book Eagle and Sword: The Federalists and the Creation of the Military Establishment in America, 1783–1802, Richard Kohn writes:

“No principle of government was more widely understood or more completely accepted by the generation of Americans that established the United States than the danger of a standing army in peacetime. Because a standing army represented the ultimate in uncontrolled and controllable power, any nation that maintained permanent forces surely risked the overthrow of legitimate government and the introduction of tyranny and despotism.”

~MFP


08/22/2018 

While many defenders of private gun ownership recognize that the Second Amendment was written to provide some sort of counterbalance against the coercive power of the state, this argument is often left far too vague to reflect an accurate view of this historical context surrounding the Amendment.

After all, it is frequently pointed out that private ownership of shotguns and semi-automatic rifles could offer only very limited resistance to the extremely well-equipped and well-armed United States military.

It is often, therefore, just assumed that the writers of the Second Amendment were naïve and incapable of seeing the vast asymmetries that would develop between military weaponry and the sort of weaponry the average person was likely to use.

Was the plan really to just have unorganized amateurs grab their rifles and repel the invasion of a well-trained military force?1

The answer is no, and we know this by looking at the wording and reasoning behind the Second Amendment. The text, of course, reads “A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”

Gun-rights advocates often fixate on the second half of the amendment, claiming that the phrase about a militia is just something that provides a reasoning for the second phrase. Many opponents of gun control even suggest that the only phrase here of key importance is “shall not be infringed.”

The Second Amendment as a Guard Against a Standing Army

Looking at the debates surrounding the Second Amendment and military power at the end of the eighteenth century, however, we find that the authors of the Second Amendment had a more sophisticated vision of gun ownership than is often assumed.

Continue reading “Why We Can’t Ignore the “Militia” Clause of the Second Amendment”