15 responses so far ↓

• 1 Charles Fockaert // Feb 21, 2007 at 5:30 pm

  Lee Kittell and Dale Harapat - what great news!

  Two guys taking appropriate action, exercising free speech and the right to assemble and peacefully protest - was so effective that they got arrested.

  Let’s bombard the criminals that violated these two men’s Constitutional rights with our condemnation.

  Every law enforcement officer in the United States swears this or a very simliar oath before taking office:

  I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.

  Here is the Oath of Honor most law enforcement personnel are required to adhere to:

  On my honor,
  I will never betray my badge,
  my integrity, my character,
  or the public trust.
  I will always have
  the courage to hold myself
  and others accountable for our actions.
  I will always uphold the constitution
  my community and the agency I serve.

  http://theiacp.org/profassist/ethics/what_is_oath_of_honor.htm

  Perhaps legal action against those who arrested Lee Kittell and Dale Harapat is in order?

• 2 roland riemers // Feb 21, 2007 at 6:16 pm

  Surprise, free speech is not really free these days. But there are some helpful things you can do without going into court. When I am out do political work I assume I will be hassled by officials, so I always carry the following items:
  1. A copy of the latest U.S. Supreme Court (Watchtower Bible Society v. the City of Stranton) plus any affirmative decisions from the local state courts.
  2. A cpoy of any state laws that may be useful. For instance, in North Dakota it is a Class A misdermeanor for a government official to use his office to deny you your constitutional rights. So, when the officials hassle me, I cite the laws, and ask another officer to kindly arrest the officer that is giving me a problem. Usually no arrests are made and the police disappear into the woodwork after checking the situation over with their superiors.
  3. I let friends or relatives know where I will be so they can rescue me from the authorities (if they are so inclined).
  4. I ALWAYS carry adequate bail money on me, say $1,000 in cash for those situations that get out of hand.
  5. I am ALWAYS polite but firm in defending my rights.

  So yes, on rare occasions I do get arrested, but it is very, very short. But for political protesting I have pushed the limits and have stood in the state capital in a judical robe carry a protest sign, and several of us have also stood up in a Supreme Court hearing petitioning the court for fairness. (we do this before the court is gaveled into sesson so we are not interrupting court proceedings).
  Roland Riemers of North Dakota, riemers@wiktel.com

• 3 jonnieduke // Feb 21, 2007 at 11:24 pm

  Anyone contact the ACLU?

• 4 Kevin Merck // Feb 22, 2007 at 12:00 am

  There were a lot of these types of civil rights violations in the sixties. Local “law enforcement” was usually a big part of the problem. The states have a lot at stake in this corruption and complaining to them is like complaining to the fox that is stealing your chickens.

  This was a matter for the FBI in the sixties and it still is today. We have to get the feds involved in these violations. Here is a phone number to the FBI in Albuquerque, New Mexico. Some of them are good people, and I think they will be happy to look into these complaints with sincerity and integrity, or direct us to someone who will. I think some people in law enforcement are genuinely concerned with protecting people’s rights.

  I think any of them who read Carol Rhodes’s book, will not be any happier about the corruption than we are. They are taxpayers too, and will not like the idea that $50 of taxpayer’s money is being misappropriated, for every dollar extorted from non-custodial parents. You only have to be human, to be repulsed by the kidnapping of millions of children from one of their parents, for the purpose extortion.

  Albuquerque, New Mexico FBI (505-889-1300)

  Kevin Merck

• 5 seanheeger.com // Feb 22, 2007 at 2:50 am

  set up a gripe site then fax it to these freedom destroying assholes.

  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gripe_site

  It’s effective when implemented properly.

  it ’s working for me.

  MercantileSucks.Com

• 6 johnqpublic // Feb 23, 2007 at 3:07 am

  Unfortunately, situations like this are being seen in our country every day. Citizens making a lawful protest, on public property like on sidewalks or in front of City Hall or a Court House are getting haulled off to jail.

  The reason they can get away with it is that they (the government) pass laws or ordinances to prohibit such lawful behavior, to shelter “public officials” that trample the rights of citizens.

  So what to do? What can be done? Who will do it?

  1) Heck, run for public office or support somebody that will promote your viewpoint and protect your rights.

  2) Campaign against those who oppress your rights, urge family and friends to vote against them.

  3) Move to towns, states or regions or even countries that are more supportive of your rights. Take your education, skills and financial resources to the states or countries that value you.

  4) Finally, pray for America, Land of the Free and home of the Brave. Ultimately God is watching over all of us. Men make plans, but God guides their foot steps.

  God bless you.
  Chuck

• 7 Kevin Merck // Feb 26, 2007 at 9:40 am

  “Just the facts Madam.”

  “American fathers are led down a primrose path every day in our family courts, often with disastrous legal results. They wind up in the Land of Gender Bias, where they are systematically stripped of their rights, often without the slightest idea of why it is happening to them.

  “If you think the mother-father disparity is outrageous, consider the sexual abuse syndrome, and how it affects visitation and custody disputes. Here, the judicial impotence and chronic blindness to men’s rights would appall you.

  “Courts are supposed to approach cases of child custody, support payments, and visitation rights in what we call a gender-neutral posture. It sounds fair, and it is fair. But it is a myth. Judges are not enforcing these gender laws fairly, and few seem to care.

  “We will see more of these problems until fathers organize to demand fairer treatment. So get it together dads: You have a legitimate legal beef and you need to make this a public issue. Right now the courts don’t hear you.”

  - Judge Judy Sheindlin,

• 8 wdfields // Mar 1, 2007 at 7:09 pm

  May we express concern of apparent use of loving parents of America for covert launchings of socialist agendas within our own borders?

  May we further express concern of a possibility that we may be paying foot-soldiers of such socialist for cultivation and propagation of suspect agendas under auspices of our children? And may such shelter within skewed-use of “sugar and spice and everything nice?”

  Respecting the potential triggers of such cloaking and with aim for honoring obligations owing to the respect all individuals, we may consider mentally understanding that “child” and/or “children” are as “child of the almighty” or “children of God.” Surely, we may all be deemed Children of the Almighty.

  And in so doing, may we thus remain diligent in honors owing to the respect of all Children? And likewise, we may in turn facilitate similar needs of respects and examples owing to even children of our own.

  It seems unclear how some may try to support and rationalize the targeting of any loving parent for plunder and denigration. And if so lured, under what basis or explanation as the legacy lent to our children might one then find in support of teachings for the obligations owing to Dignity of all Children of the Almighty?

  Upon stepping onto the slippery slope of discrimination, one may find it as a difficult stage from thence to stand uprightly.

  Today, we have 50 billion dollars per year flowing to various contractors/entities/interests via various States under the banner of “family services.” Yet we already know, and I by my own recent experience, that various attempts for petitioning assistance of such “family services” may in fact be met with out-right open denials and/or even retaliations. In fact, such petitions may even be countered with various threats under color of law, libels, slanders and harms to livelihood and health. Of course, we may clearly and immediately recognize such retaliations would be representative of anything but help to health or welfare of community, family, individual or commerce, let alone of our Children.

  We can, should and must strive for greater clarity.

  With sincerity of expression in service,
  - just adad

• 9 Kevin Merck // Mar 10, 2007 at 9:30 am

  http://www.aclu.org/police/gen/14528res20040730.html

• 10 joepetitioner // Mar 30, 2007 at 9:21 am

  It is very interesting to learn that another protest involving members of the same group made the local news in Albuquerque.
  ” Someone in the Albuquerque demonstration on Friday handed out a flier suggesting that it would be a good idea if a Second District Court judge died, too— and perhaps her children, as well” (see link http://www.abqjournal.com/belshaw/1bels03-13-05.htm )
  Center for Family Justice founder and president Leslie Cumiford has been very closely involved with a campaign to to eliminate a fathers presence in his two childrens lives, going so far as to orchestrate a television news piece that Identifies the children on camera, disrupt numerous court hearings and intimidate court officials and parents.
  PLEASE understand that there are hidden agendas and miss-guided people involved in this issue and there are ALWAYS at least 3 sides to these stories.

• 11 Kevin Merck // Mar 31, 2007 at 10:33 am

  The people who are responsible for the kidnapping of millions of children from one of their parents for the purpose of extortion and embezzlement should be expected to stoop to any level imaginable. No one should be surprised by any tactic, no matter how low, that these people will resort.

  Instead of drawing unjustifiable conclusions based on little or no evidence, we should be busy about the task of finding out exactly who is responsible for the flier referred to in this article.

  http://www.abqjournal.com/belshaw/1bels03-13-05.htm

  The Federal Courts need to get involved in this.

• 12 joepetitioner // Mar 31, 2007 at 1:07 pm

  My point is, The CFJ (Center for Family “Justice”) has used these and simular tactics to atempt to keep a father from recieving even minimal visitation with his children. This protest was aimed at a judge who was hearing this case that day! The hearing was to enforce court ordered visitation for the father. The mother, a member of the CFJ was willing to use any tactic, no matter how low to deny the father ANY contact with his children. That father, with the help of the courts and law enforcment, conceals his identity from the CFJ! He does so to avoid further attacks against his constitutional right to due proccess! The federal courts are involved. The CFJ does not publicize its defeats!

• 13 joepetitioner // Mar 31, 2007 at 1:35 pm

  The CFJ rutinely plants members wearing CFJ logos in the courtroom during many hearings, They have publicly blasted court officers and attorneys for trying to enforce shared custody agreements.
  Their president has tried in numerous ways to intimidate fathers for seeking visitation and Judges for trying to enforce non-custodial fathers rights.
  She began her crusade while attempting to deny visitation between her own child and the father
  http://www.nmcourts.com/caselookup/searchDetail.htm?caseId=D-202-DM-9502675&caseTitle=&fromDate=2000-01-19&toDate=2000-02-19&fromPage=psr

• 14 leslie cumiford // Sep 7, 2007 at 11:19 pm

  Hello. This is Leslie Cumiford, the person whom joepetitioner has been unabashedly deriding. How shameful he is! Thank you to those of you who have a modicum of reason, and realize that activists for such an important cause as parental rights will be attacked not only from the system they fight to reform, but, sadly, from the ranks of disgruntled and beleagered parents as well. Dispelling some of the trash in your blog: CFJ is comprised of at least as many men as it is women (more men at this point in time, I believe). I think you will find our website, http://www.family-justice.org, to be very balanced. The Jim Belshaw article speaks of a flyer that was distributed by a woman we only met once, who proceeded to get favors from family court Judge Walker in return. A courthouse security person, also a father in a (different) case with Judge Walker, who posed as an investigator afterward tried to get information out of our group and find a reason to bring up some kind of charges against our leadership. It fell through when one of our board members, a (male) police sargeant, found out who he was, the guard admitted to us in a recorded conversation that he was not an investigator and that Judge Walker had asked him to question us, and we let the Sheriff’s dept know about the collusion with Judge Walker and the security guard’s impending (within 3 weeks) custody decision in Walker’s courtroom. Of course, they did nothing about it. We have all the evidence of this fiasco, but chose instead to focus on parents’ stories on our website because we never have enough time to publicize all the evidence we have. Note that our last several stories have focused exclusively on men. I have a message for joepetitioner: as I have told you in person many times, we are not your enemy, and neither are women/mothers. I know who you are, and will be kind enough not to print your name here, this time. In our organization, we do not allow anyone to bash the opposite sex or the issues traditionally associated with that particular sex. Every public demonstration to either protect a child from real abuse (we require medical records of abuse before we believe it) or fight for a noncustodial parent’s rights (and we do more work on this than on the abuse issue) is attended by both our male and female members. We have as many females as we do males who do not get any contact with their children, yet our males tend to be more activist and vocal on this issue. The judges, attorneys, and cottage industry who take your money while you fight with the other parent and women in general laugh when they read entries like that of joepetitioner. They find it hilarious that you do not understand where your opposition is coming from. Do you still have a dollar in your pocket? Do you own any property? That is what they are after, not your children or support for females. It is icing on the cake to them when they take your children and money and you blame the other parent. We have seen females deride and slander our organization, too, because they think we are the enemy for supporting men as fathers. As I always say: when the men of this country join in with the women of this country and fight the system that is destroying both for the almighty dollar, we will finally see success. I personally authored the article about Dale and Lee in the beginning of this blog, and have fought long and hard for them and their rights to their children for several years (along with the rights of many others). Guys, that means I stayed up way past midnight many a night, got out in the streets, and sacrificed my time and energy with my own family for something more than putting crap on a website about another group I know nothing about. My own son was taken from me for no reason and I was never going to get to see him again. Let me assure you, it had nothing to do with father or me or either of our parenting - I was a high-tech business owner and the VP of a large accounting firm here publicly announced (in a meeting that included many lawyers) that my company was going to be the next major employer in Albuquerque. They were after my stock, and taking my son from me was a good start at grabbing my assets. Today I own no property and have lost my company along with hundreds of thousands of dollars. Except for several (male) media persons who sacrificed their careers for the sake of my son, I would be without him today. I have never asked for reduced visitation between my son and his father in any way. What you see in my nmcourts online record is a whole bunch of titles of motions put forth by a crooked guardian ad litem who charged over $60,000 for 9 months of “work”. Don’t you think it’s time to give it a rest and get to the real issues? As for those of you who run this site, may I suggest that you block joepetitioner from your blog? He’s using your avenue to bash a group that is fighting (and succeeding) for dad’s rights to see their children, just like you, and the dads in CFJ are furious about the spurious slander against us on this blog. I imagine you’ll be hearing from them soon, but I decided to tackle it first. For the record my son and his father both know that if Dad is in town, my son is available. In spite of that, Dad has never chosen to show up. Nevertheless, he has one of the most liberal visitation schedules (for an out-of-town parent) I have ever seen for a school-aged child, and I pay thousands of dollars every year so that my son can fly to his father’s house. I have never complained about it because it is important to my son’s development to have a relationship with his Dad. I just wish he desired to spend time with my son as much as many of you (and many of CFJ’s Dads) desire to see their children. More power to those of you fighting the good fight, and shame on joepetitioner - I hope you prevent him from using your site as an avenue to slander others.

• 15 karyl lowey // Sep 8, 2007 at 6:43 pm

  Response to Joe Petitioner;
  You said this: closely involved with a campaign to to eliminate a fathers presence in his two childrens lives, going so far as to orchestrate a television news piece that Identifies the children on camera, disrupt numerous court hearings and intimidate court officials and parents.
  When was this?

  You said this: hidden agendas and miss-guided people involved in this issue and there are ALWAYS at least 3 sides to these stories.
  And Joe, what is your agenda at writing this?

  You said this: The CFJ (Center for Family “Justice”) has used these and simular tactics to atempt to keep a father from recieving even minimal visitation with his children. This protest was aimed at a judge who was hearing this case that day!
  And Joe, are you the father that is involved in this case?

  You said this: That father, with the help of the courts and law enforcment, conceals his identity from the CFJ! He does so to avoid further attacks against his constitutional right to due proccess! The federal courts are involved.
  And Joe, you state that the courts and law enforcement and federal courts are involved to conceal your identity so that your constituional right to due process is not attacked? What about your identity needs to be concealed? Why does your identity need to be concealed to protect your due process rights?

  This part doesn’t make sense.

  Joe, you said: The CFJ rutinely plants members wearing CFJ logos in the courtroom during many hearings, They have publicly blasted court officers and attorneys for trying to enforce shared custody agreements.
  Their president has tried in numerous ways to intimidate fathers for seeking visitation and Judges for trying to enforce non-custodial fathers rights.
  She began her crusade while attempting to deny visitation between her own child and the father

  Joe, I have only seen CFJ support visitation and I have NOT seen court officers and attorneys enforce shared custody agreements, even those written by the same judge. I have not seen CFJ members, board members or president of CFJ intimidate fathers seeking visitation, in fact, I have seen members, board members and CFJ president become personally involved to do what they can for the child to have access to both parents. I have not seen members, board members or CFJ president attempt to deny any visitation between parent and child unless there is a MOUNTAIN of evidence that would indicate the child is in SEVERE danger.

  Joe, You are mistaken on many points and it would seem that you are hiding more than your identity behind the words you write as they cannot be verified by any of the parents who are both fathers and mothers as CFJ members, and as CFJ board members or as bystanders who watch and observe within the court system.

  Joe, If you have legitimate evidence of this, post ALL (ALL) of your court documents, for us all to see your evidence of statements made, and black out your name, etc, or perhaps there may be a different reason why your identity needs to be concealed.

You must log in to post a comment.