AP, Justice Department Devil’s Advocate Surveillance taking our rights away, not Al-Qaeda’ – 844-292-1318 legal aid Prichard Alabama

AP: Justice Department seizure of phone records an unprecedented intrusion
Obama administration took records in apparent effort to track down source who disclosed alleged Yemen terrorist plot story
Ewen MacAskill in Washington – The Guardian, Tuesday 14 May 2013
The Obama administration has opened up a new front in its battle against media freedom by seizing phone records from the offices of the Associated Press news agency in what appeared to be an effort to track down the source who disclosed an alleged Yemen terrorist plot story.
The US attorney’s office for the District of Columbia confirmed on Monday that subpoenas had been issued for phone records. It said it valued press freedom but it had to balance this against the public interest.
AP revealed on Monday that the justice department, without informing the organisation in advance, had obtained two months’ worth of phone records of calls made by reporters and editors.
Lawyers for AP said the records, which the justice department appears to have obtained from the phone companies earlier this year, listed every call made by about 100 reporters from AP’s main offices in New York, Washington and Hartford, Connecticut, and from its office in the House of Representatives press gallery between April and May last year. The justice department informed AP last Friday. AP described it as a “massive and unprecedented intrusion” into newsgathering operations.
The attorney’s office refused to say why the seizure had been made but it is almost certainly in relation to an AP exclusive report on 7 May last year in which it reported the CIA had stopped a plot by an al-Qaida affiliate in Yemen to destroy a US-bound airliner.
AP at the time agreed to White House and CIA requests to hold back publication because they said an intelligence operation was still under way. After being satisfied that these concerns had been met, AP published on the Monday, ignoring a request from the Obama administration to wait until Tuesday for the official announcement.
The justice department has since launched an investigation into the leak. The phone records of five of the reporters plus an editor involved in the Yemen story were among those taken.
AP’s president and chief executive officer, Gary Pruitt, sent a letter of protest to the attorney-general, Eric Holder. “These records potentially reveal communications with confidential sources across all of the newsgathering activities undertaken by the AP during a two-month period, provide a road map to AP’s newsgathering operations, and disclose information about AP’s activities and operations that the government has no conceivable right to know,” Pruitt said.
He described it as “serious interference with AP’s constitutional rights to gather and report the news”.

The ACLU last night condemned the DOJ’s acts as “press intimidation” and said it constitutes “an unacceptable abuse of power”. The Electronic Frontier Foundation denounced it as “a terrible blow against the freedom of the press and the ability of reporters to investigate and report the news”. The New York Times’ Editorial Page Editor Andy Rosenthal called the DOJ’s actions “outrageous” while Washington Post Executive Editor Marty Baron said they were “shocking” and “disturbing”. Even Democratic Sen. Pat Leahy, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, said: “I am very troubled by these allegations and want to hear the government’s explanation.”
Numerous media reports convincingly speculated that the DOJ’s actions arise out of a 2012 AP article that contained leaked information about CIA activity in Yemen, and the DOJ is motivated, in part, by a desire to uncover the identity of AP’s sources. That 2012 AP story revealed that the CIA was able to “thwart” a planned bombing by the al-Qaida “affiliate” in that country of a US jetliner. AP had learned of the CIA actions a week earlier but “agreed to White House and CIA requests not to publish it immediately because the sensitive intelligence operation was still under way.” AP revealed little that the US government itself was not planning to reveal and that would not have been obvious once the plot was successfully thwarted, as it explained in its story: “once those concerns were allayed, the AP decided to disclose the plot Monday despite requests from the Obama administration to wait for an official announcement Tuesday.”
The legality of the DOJ’s actions is impossible to assess because it is not even known what legal authority it claims nor the legal process it invoked to obtain these records. Particularly in the post-9/11 era, the DOJ’s power to obtain phone records is, as I’ve detailed many times, dangerously broad.
Video Rating: / 5

Alabama Gun Rights – 844-292-1318 legal aid Northport Alabama

Have you ever read the U. S. Constitution? Do you know your rights? A group called Alabama Gun Rights is hosting a special event that could help you better understand what is and isn’t legal regarding firearms, and the responsibility that comes along with owning a gun.

OAD: Wednesday, July 4th, 2012
Video Rating: / 5

No Shave, No Make Up November for Fathers Rights Awareness – 844-292-1318 Iowa legal aid

No Shave,  No Make Up November for Fathers Rights Awareness

Starting this November Paternal Guardians of Iowa is declaring the month of November Father’s Rights Awareness month. We want to use this month to raise awareness of the injustices that fathers are force to endure and go through to gain the most basics of parental rights.

Recently I have had a conversation with an individual who is currently fighting against these injustices of the legal system. His story is a perfect example of just how unfair and unbalance the system really is for fathers. His son is currently two months old and he hasn’t yet been able to see him. When his son was born the mother immediately gave him up for adoption and would end up leaving the hospital with the adoption agency. Upon hearing the news of his child being born the father fought for a DNA test and when the results came back he was indeed the father. After finding out the results the adoption agency return the child to the mother, which she would end up returning the child to the family who is now trying to privately adopt him. Now that family has continued to refuse to give the child to his father and has petition the juvenile court to terminate the fathers’ rights to the child. At the end of the month the father has to appear in court and ask the judge to simply not terminate his right to being a father to his son. Even if the court rules in favor of him he will still not have any rights or visitation with his son until he is able to return to district court for a temporary hearing on custody.

Our mission here at Paternal Guardians of Iowa is advocating for fathers that are going through situations just like this one. We are their voice and we are raising awareness by making sure their stories are being told. For the future, we will not only be their voice but also their support system and providing direct aid to help level the playing field. In order to achieve both of goals and continue to grow we have to start fundraising. So, for our first annual fundraising we present No Shave, No Make-up November.

Here’s how it works:

Gentlemen, starting on Nov 1st you will pledge a dollar amount for the amount of days you are going to go without shaving and are encourage to share daily photos on our Facebook page. Then the fun begins with you cash challenging someone else to do the same. For example, I am pledging .00 for all 30 days of November I plan on going without shaving. I am also challenging my best friends Cain that if he can go 2 weeks without shaving I will donate additional to Paternal Guardians of Iowa.

Ladies, starting on Nov 1st you will pledge a dollar amount for the amount of days you are going to go without wearing make-up and are encourage to share daily photos on our Facebook page. The cash challenge part remains the same as it is with the gentlemen. Anyone can challenge anyone, so not just ladies can challenge ladies etc.

Prizes, For the gentlemen we have three gift cards to Pancheros. They will go to the winners of each of the following categories; highest donor, longest beard, and most pathetic beard. For the ladies, we have three gift cards to Cold Stone Creamery. They will go to the winner of each of the following categories; highest donor, most consecutive days without make-up, and most total days without wearing make-up (does not have to be consecutive).

Grand Prize, now for the individual who is the highest donor will get the privilege of cutting Nick Shrimer’s beard off. For those of you who do not know him he has been growing this beard for years and he has graciously offered it up to help raise awareness for Father’s Rights! Google Zztop and that is what you will have the honor of snipping off.

Here’s the link to our GoFundMe page to donate to Paternal Guardians of Iowa.

If you would like a receipt please provide me with your address and amount donated by sending me an email at rknapp.paternalguardians@gmail.com

Thanks for all the support!

Minnesota’s Usurpation of Parental Rights – 844-292-1318 Minnesota legal aid

Minnesota's Usurpation of Parental Rights

This is video of a Press Conference regarding Parental Rights in Minnesota.

The Child Protection League (CPL) exists to protect children from exploitation, indoctrination and violence.

CPL is eager to support Anmarie Calgaro in her legal challenge to the grievous assault on her parental due process civil rights, protected by the 14th amendment to the U.S. Constitution. We are grateful she is willing to take this bold step, because she gives voice to countless parents and families across the country that are being similarly harmed.

St. Louis County Public Health and Human Services, Park Nicollet Health Services, Fairview Health Services of Hibbing, and the St. Louis County School District have essentially eliminated Ms. Calgaro’s parental rights. Based on nothing more than a statement of “emancipation” issued by the free services of a legal aid group, and without any court order, these entities are treating this 17 year old minor as if he is an adult.

They are financing and prescribing dangerous hormonal drugs and prescription narcotics to a minor without his mother’s knowledge, involvement, or consent. She is blocked from even viewing his health and school records. For his safety and for his welfare, Ms. Calgaro wants and needs to be involved with the on-going medical care and education of her child. She is denied any avenue to plead her case in court.

Children are too often being used as pawns for the financial and political designs of special interest groups, groups that cannot have the level of regard for the personal, long-term wellbeing of a child as does a parent. Government agencies and health care providers should be protective buffers for minors. They should never be party to violating the rights of a parent to oversee the needs of her child.

The decisions underage children make about themselves often have permanent consequences that will affect their relationships, their families, their health and their emotional stability for a lifetime. And yet, the very person who knows, loves, and is most deeply committed to her child, is being excluded from providing for him at his hour of greatest need.

Few values are more sacred, more deeply regarded, than the nurturing bond of a loving parent/child relationship. Disregarding and trampling that bond severely harms children and families. CPL urges the court to declare that Ms. Calgaro’s due process rights under the U.S.
Constitution have been violated and to issue an injunction restoring her full parental rights until her due process rights have been restored.

We encourage, support, and defend Ms. Calgaro’s courageous lawsuit. She deserves everyone’s respect, admiration and support. It may have enormous implications for all families and children.

legal aid| 049745269|Wellington 6011|wrongful dismissal|emergency|employment rights – 844-292-1318 Idaho legal aid

If you got an employment case that needs legal assistance and representation by an attorney, you must be wary in choosing the right employment lawyer. It is your exclusive right to choose an advocate to uphold your worker’s rights. But how do you start scouting for the right lawyer?

First, you need to be sure of three things that must be present with an employment lawyer: first, he must be specialized with employment laws; second, he should represent the employees of his jurisdiction; and third, he must have his own office or he comes from a law firm in your state.

Most labor unions have a pool of referrals for lawyers who can handle employment cases like yours. But if you’re out on your own to look for a lawyer, you can refer to websites that usually contains details about their background and track record. Yellow pages can be a good resource too. The National Employment Lawyers Association (www.nela.org) has a repository of lawyer information that represents employees (not employers). You can also ask referral from friends or other lawyers (use the free lawyer referral service from your local state bar association). Be sure that you choose a lawyer within a short period of time, because most legal claims have time limits so it’s best to act on your claim as soon as you’ve secured the lawyer of your choice.

It’s also advisable to keep a list of possible lawyers that you fancy working with, then you narrow the list to about three. Apply the rules of collect and select here. Then you schedule an appointment with these three lawyers. Once you’ve talked with them you will then have a better disposition to choose the best lawyer you can find.

Remember that because of the nature of employment laws, time is of the essence when you choose an employment lawyer. Be sure that you choose carefully in haste so your claims don’t get delayed.

employment relations act Wellington city employment relations act Wellington District employment relations act 6011 employment relations act 6012 employment relations act 6021
legal aid Wellington city legal aid Wellington District legal aid 6011 legal aid 6012 legal aid 6021
employment law Wellington city employment law Wellington District employment law 6011 employment law 6012 employment law 6021
employment rights Wellington city employment rights Wellington District employment rights 6011 employment rights 6012 employment rights 6021
redundancy Wellington city redundancy Wellington District redundancy 6011 redundancy 6012 redundancy 6021
employment law nz Wellington city employment law nz Wellington District employment law nz 6011 employment law nz 6012 employment law nz 6021
nz employment law Wellington city nz employment law Wellington District nz employment law 6011 nz employment law 6012 nz employment law 6021
redundancy law Wellington city redundancy law Wellington District redundancy law 6011 redundancy law 6012 redundancy law 6021
unfair dismissal Wellington city unfair dismissal Wellington District unfair dismissal 6011 unfair dismissal 6012 unfair dismissal 6021
new zealand employment law Wellington city new zealand employment law Wellington District new zealand employment law 6011 new zealand employment law 6012 new zealand employment law 6021
law for business Wellington city law for business Wellington District law for business 6011 law for business 6012 law for business 6021
employment relations act Wellington city employment relations act Wellington District employment relations act 6011 employment relations act 6012 employment relations act 6021
insurance law Wellington city insurance law Wellington District insurance law 6011 insurance law 6012 insurance law 6021
employment law new zealand Wellington city employment law new zealand Wellington District employment law new zealand 6011 employment law new zealand 6012 employment law new zealand 6021
employment law changes Wellington city employment law changes Wellington District employment law changes 6011 employment law changes 6012 employment law changes 6021
wrongful dismissal Wellington city wrongful dismissal Wellington District wrongful dismissal 6011 wrongful dismissal 6012 wrongful dismissal 6021
new zealand employment law Wellington city new zealand employment law Wellington District new zealand employment law 6011 new zealand employment law 6012 new zealand employment law 6021
corporate lawyer Wellington city corporate lawyer Wellington District corporate lawyer 6011 corporate lawyer 6012 corporate lawyer 6021
business lawyer Wellington city business lawyer Wellington District business lawyer 6011 business lawyer 6012 business lawyer 6021
commercial lawyers Wellington city commercial lawyers Wellington District commercial lawyers 6011 commercial lawyers 6012 commercial lawyers 6021
employment law training Wellington city employment law training Wellington District employment law training 6011 employment law training 6012 employment law training 6021