65th Anniversary of the FBI’s Ten Most Wanted Fugitives Program

Washington, D.C. March 11, 2015

FBI National Press Office (202) 324-3691

The FBI this Month announced the FBI’s commemoration of its famous Ten Most Wanted Fugitives program, created 65 years ago.

In 1949, a reporter for the International News Service (the predecessor to United Press International) approached the FBI and asked about writing a story about the “toughest guys” being sought by the FBI at the time. The Bureau provided the names and descriptions of 10 fugitives to the reporter. The resulting feature became a major story and garnered national attention. In response to the overwhelming public interest, on March 14, 1950, then Director J. Edgar Hoover inaugurated the FBI’s Ten Most Wanted Fugitives program.

Since then, the FBI, through the Top Ten list, has been asking for help from the public to locate its most dangerous fugitives. The response has been impressive. Since 1950, 504 fugitives have appeared on the list; 473 have been apprehended or located, with 156 of those fugitives located as a direct result of citizen cooperation.

As the nature of crime and FBI priorities have evolved over the years, the makeup of the Top Ten list has also changed. While the list began by featuring bank robbers and murder suspects fleeing state jurisdiction, it has evolved into a tool to search for major organized crime figures, cyber criminals, child predators, and white-collar criminals. The list also reflects the international scope of crime which emphasizes the importance of strong global partnerships in the search for violent criminals who know no boundaries and pose a significant danger to all.

Just as the composition of the list of Top Ten fugitives has changed over the years, the ways in which the FBI communicates with the public have also been revolutionized by technological advancements. While the publication of fugitive information via newspapers and magazines initially brought broader participation to the program, the FBI now uses the Internet, television, social media, and digital billboards as it continues to seek the public’s assistance in locating wanted fugitives.

The FBI places a high priority on the fugitive investigations represented on the list. At a minimum, a reward of up to $100,000 is offered by the FBI for information leading directly to the arrest of a Top Ten fugitive. In some instances, the reward amount offered exceeds $100,000.

That reporter’s idea, so many years ago, to form a partnership among law enforcement, the media, and the citizens of the world, continues to prove beneficial today. As the FBI’s Ten Most Wanted Fugitives program celebrates 65 years of success, the expectation is that it will continue to empower citizens across the country and around the world to safely and effectively assist law enforcement for years to come.

More information about the Ten Most Wanted Fugitives program, including the current list of fugitives, is available on the FBI’s website at www.fbi.gov/wanted/topten.

After a Twelve Year Mistake in Iraq, We Must Just March Home

Written by Ron Paul, M.D.

Twelve years ago last week, the US launched its invasion of Iraq, an act the late General William Odom predicted would turn out to be “the greatest strategic disaster in US history.” Before the attack I was accused of exaggerating the potential costs of the war when I warned that it could end up costing as much as $100 billion. One trillion dollars later, with not one but two “mission accomplished” moments, we are still not done intervening in Iraq. President Obama last year ordered the US military back into Iraq for the third time. It seems the Iraq “surge” and the Sunni “Awakening,” for which General David Petraeus had been given much credit, were not as successful as was claimed at the time. From the sectarian violence unleashed by the US invasion of Iraq emerged al-Qaeda and then its more radical spin-off, ISIS. So Obama sent the US military back. We recently gained even more evidence (https://news.vice.com/article/the-cia-just-declassified the-document-that-supposedly-justified-the-iraq-invasion) that the initial war was sold on lies and fabrications. The CIA finally declassified much of its 2002 National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq, which was the chief document used by the Bush Administration to justify the US attack. According to the Estimate, the US Intelligence Community concluded that: '[W]e are unable to determine whether [biological weapons] agent research has resumed...' And: 'the information we have on Iraqi nuclear personnel does not appear consistent with a coherent effort to reconstitute a nuclear weapons program.' But even as the US Intelligence Community had reached this conclusion, President Bush told the American people that Iraq, "possesses and produces chemical and biological weapons" and "the evidence indicates that Iraq is reconstituting its nuclear weapons program." Likewise, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld’s “bulletproof” evidence that Saddam Hussein had ties with al-Qaeda was contradicted by the National Intelligence Estimate, which concluded that there was no operational tie between Hussein’s government and al-Qaeda. Even National Security Advisor Condolezza Rice’s famous statement that the aluminum tubes that Iraq was purchasing "are only really suited for nuclear weapons programs, centrifuge programs," and "we don't want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud," was based on evidence she must have known at the time was false. According to the NIE, the Energy Department had already concluded that the tubes were "consistent with applications to rocket motors" and "this is the more likely end use." It is hard to believe that in a society supposedly governed by the rule of law, US leaders can escape any penalty for using blatantly false information – that they had to know at the time was false – to launch a pre-emptive attack on a country that posed no threat to the United States. The fact that they got away with it simply makes it all the easier for Washington’s interventionists to try the same tricks again. They already did with Libya and Syria. It is likely they are also doing the same with claims of a Russian “invasion” of Ukraine. Last week President Obama correctly blamed the current chaos in Iraq on the Bush Administration’s decision to invade. He said, “… ISIL is a direct outgrowth of al Qaeda in Iraq that grew out of our invasion. Which is an example of unintended consequences. Which is why we should generally aim before we shoot.” However, if the US intervention in Iraq created the “unintended consequences” of ISIS and alQaeda, how is it that more US intervention can solve the problem? A war based on lies cannot be fixed by launching another war. We must just march home. And stay home.

Copyright © 2015 by RonPaul Institute.

Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit and a live link are given.Ron Paul

RAISING WELL-BALANCED CHILDREN

written by Cindie Trieber

The New Year is off to a great start here at North Valley and in the Trieber home. What a fun and special time the holidays were! Time with family, friends and our staff made the holidays very special.
Two “extra special” gifts that pastor and I received on Christmas Day were the announcements that we are adding two more grandbabies to the family in 2014! Tim and Rebecca are expecting baby number three; Ryan and Tiffany are expecting baby number five—eleven grandchildren to call us Nana and Papa! Does it get any better than that?
Boys are way out in front with seven (God’s perfect number), and girls are way behind with just two. The two granddaughters we have are so special. If we end up with just the two of them, it is perfectly fine, and what papa wouldn’t like to rack up the number of boys to nine? To watch your children marry and serve the Lord is incredible, but the grandchildren “put the icing on the cake!” We look forward to these two additions to the family.
It is also our privilege to teach The Home class at GSBC this semester. Pastor and I enjoy “tag team” teaching as we cover a lot of material on marriage and child rearing. While we experience growth in our family this year, it’s also a joy to experience the growth that we see in these students as we instruct and encourage them to have marriages and homes that bring honor and glory to God.
Of all the joys in life, parenting is certainly at the top of the list. It’s more than changing diapers, 2AM feedings, naptimes, toys, spit up and Mr. Rogers. It’s about taking the little life given to you by God and raising it, shaping and molding it, and watching it develop into what God would have that child to be. There is more to parenting than schedules, meals, school, homework, sports, emotional issues, spats with sibling’s, hurt feelings on the playground, book reports, drivers’ permits, drivers’ licenses, banquets, graduation, and college. It is about directing that little life to God; after all, He created this life in the first place. It takes a mom and dad with unconditional love for one another and an unconditional, unselfish love for the child. It is an awesome and sometimes tiring responsibility, but the rewards are so worthwhile.
A lesson entitled “Raising Well-Balanced Children” is listed below.

1. Be Normal.
   (Do not develop nutty ideas)
   • Children cannot attend Sunday school.
   • Children can only stay with parents.
   While giving instruction and discipline and teaching character and responsibility is vitally important, don’t forget to let children have fun once in a while! Mrs. Marlene Evans said, “If it’s not wrong, wicked, or against the Bible, leave it alone.”
2. Establish limited rules.
   • Our Lord gave us 10 commandments. Don’t constantly create new rules.
3. Raise your children from a heart of love.
   • Don’t rule with an iron fist, but from a heart full of love (Titus 2:2-4).
   • Provoke not your children to wrath (Ephesians 6:4). In other words, do not discourage them.
4. Expect Obedience.
   (Children need to learn to obey the first time every time)
   • Do not beg for it.
   • Do not whine for it.
   • Do no negotiate for it (establish right away who is in charge).
5. Be responsible to teach.
   • Ephesians 6:4 says we are to nurture and discipline our children in the admonition of the Lord. This is training by actions.
   • Teach consequences (there are consequences for doing wrong).
   • Help them read character in others.
6. Be a happy camper.
   • Children must NOT be reared in tension.
   • Stay calm.
   • Be a Spirit-filled parent.
7. Let your children see Christ in you.
   • Dad—what they see in you will be their view of the heavenly Father.
8. Listen more than you lecture.
9. Help your child find his or her future.
   • When they are small, do not worry about them wanting to be a “professional baseball player.” They will jump from one profession to the other.
   • When they are older, guide them into conversation about their future (don’t give answers, ask questions).
10.  Set a good example.
    • Do as I do—not as I say.
    • “Who you are speaks so loudly, I can’t hear what you’re saying.”

We have our children in our homes for such a short time. It is a season. Enjoy it to the fullest.
“This book of the law shall not depart out of thy mouth; but thou shalt meditate therein day and night, that thou mayest observe to do according to all that is written therein; for then thou shalt make thy way prosperous, and then thou shalt have good success.”
(Joshua 1:8)

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Cindie Trieber has served the people of NVBC for more than three decades as the Pastor’s Wife. She teaches in the college and is a godly mother and “Nana." She recently completed her first book entitled With All My Heart.

Collett Demands Disqualification of Senator Lodge

On Tuesday, May 13, 2014, Greg Collett recorded an Affidavit and Demand for Disqualification and served that demand at the Canyon County Elections office. Copies are being sent via certified mail to Ben Ysursa, Idaho Secretary of State, and Chris Yamamoto, Canyon County Clerk.

The affidavit states Collett's legal standing under Idaho Code 34-215 and outlines specific charges against Patti Anne Lodge, Chris Yamamoto, and Ben Ysursa. Collett is specifically demanding that the secretary of state revoke the certification of candidacy for Patti Anne Lodge, and that the county clerk cancel the current voter registration of Patti Anne Lodge.

Lodge has been living in District 10 since 2011, waiting for a new home to be built on her property in District 11 after her former home was donated and removed from the property.

The secretary of state certified her candidacy in District 11, stating that her situation is covered by law as a temporary situation. Collett maintains that Lodge's property does not meet the definition of "Residence" as provided for in law, therefore, she does not meet the constitutional requirement to be on the ballot.

Collett stated that his purpose at this time is to seek administrative action to resolve the concerns; however, he is prepared to take the issue to district court, if needed.

http://www.gregcollettforidaho.com/

More Information on the Senator Lodge Voter Fraud Case;

More Information on the Senator Lodge Voter Fraud Case;

On Tuesday, May 13, 2014, Greg Collett formally challenged the entry of Patti Anne Lodge's name as it appeared in the election register, noting the reason as "does not live in the district". According to Idaho Code 34-431, any registered elector may challenge an entry in the election register at the time of any election. Collett had previously inquired at the election office about making a challenge during the early voting time period, but was informed that there was no practical way for that to occur. The software and method of record keeping simply did not provide for that scenario.

Patti Anne Lodge solved the dilemma unknowingly by going in to vote early, which caused her name to be printed in the election register. The elections office notified Collett, who was then able to go in and record the challenge. Collett was informed that the secretary of state
had been consulted, and that their office had made a note to address the early voting challenge situation during the next legislative session.

When an entry is challenged in the election register, the county clerk is required to mail an inquiry to the challenged elector, who then has the option to respond. If the response does not satisfy the clerk, a hearing is scheduled so the challenged elector can present evidence of qualification. If the challenged elector fails to make the statement, or if the clerk determines at the conclusion of the hearing that the registration is not valid, the clerk is required to cancel the registration.

Lodge has been living in District 10 since 2011, waiting for a new home to be built on her property in District 11 after her former home was donated and removed from the property.

The secretary of state certified her candidacy in District 11, stating that her situation is covered by law as a temporary situation. Collett maintains that Lodge's property does not meet the definition of "Residence" as provided for in law, therefore, she does not meet the constitutional requirement to be on the ballot.

America’s Marriage Miasma

By Virginia Armstrong, Ph.D., National Chairman

Has America has bent over backwards too far in its spiritual, moral, and constitutional life so that we are in danger of “breaking”? This question is central to our current series of Court Watch Briefings. The question has been precipitated by America’s Culture War and echoes the anguished cry of the Father in the famous musical production, “Fiddler on the Roof,” who felt that revolutionary changes in his world were pushing him to the “breaking point.”

We are proving that America is indeed in the “danger zone” and is in dire need of a massive “straightening up process.” Nothing more clearly demonstrates this fact than the recent same-sex marriage decisions of the U.S. Supreme Court — Perry v. Hollingsworth and Windsor v. U.S. To understand more fully these egregious decisions, we are examining the various court opinions in these cases, employing the unique and powerful analyticaltools crafted for us by the preeminent Christian apologist, Francis Schaeffer. A major theme of Schaeffer’s paradigm was to find, and respond properly to, the tension between the real world and the illogical positions of unrealistic philosophies. Thus, we are currently comparing the Judeo-Christian worldview of law and culture (which is consistent with reality) to the Humanistic worldview (which is incongruent with reality). Six crucial components constitute a worldview’s theories of law, and we shall consider in this Briefing the third of these components. We state the Judeo-Christian position in bold type and include in italics the relevant characteristic of the Western legal tradition which Professor Harold Berman has declared that the West, including America, is losing.

3. EPISTEMOLOGY:   The nature, meaning, and knowledge of legal norms and standards. Are these norms and standards absolute or relative? Must they be logical? How are they discovered, determined, articulated, interpreted, created, etc. Is there “true truth” which law must embody?

At the heart of God’s Higher Law are norms and standards thatmanifest absolute truth and meaning.They are expressed in both natural law and revealed law (the Scripture) but most perfectly in revealed law, and are inherently logical.  Man is endowed by God with powers of reason and logic and is to exercise these powers (though they are flawed by the Fall) to apprehend that law which God reveals to him. Civil (human) law should thus reflect God’s Higher Law, and man is held accountable for conforming civil law to Higher Law.

The Humanist/Reconstructionist position on epistemology is fatally flawed at every turn, as revealed in the pro-homosexual court decisions in Hollingsworth v. Perry and Windsor v. U.S. We must remember that Perry/Windsor reflect far more than the specific issues and positions of the immediate parties to the cases. Rather, they afford us a panoramic view of the entire homosexual rights battle and should be viewed in that light. Four flaws are among the most pernicious found in the pro-homosexual rights epistemology.  We exam the first two here.

1. Perry/Windsor are hypocritically ABSOLUTIST in epistemology, directly contradicting Humanism’s commitment to “relativism.”“Relativism” is one of the Humanist’s most frequently used weapons against the Judeo-Christian worldview — “all truth and meaning are relative” proclaim our foes. Yet absolutist positions permeate Humanist/Reconstructionist thought, as illustrated inPerry/Windsor.  A few examples are revealing:
   1. “All truth is relative” is a passionately proclaimed core of Humanist thought in general. But the statement itself is an absolute (non-relative) statement. Humanism is absolutist and therefore inherently oxymoronic. Yet Perry/Windsor contain many absolutist assertions, and the absurdity of these assertions is clearly illustrated by the few illustrations given below.
   2. “State definitions of marriage to include same-sex couples are within ‘the unquestioned authority of the States’” is an absolutist assertion of state government power. But if there were no “question” about this authority, there would be no Perry or Windsor— whether the states do have the “authority” to ban same-sex marriages is precisely the core question of Perry and is foundational to the issues raised in Windsor. Furthermore, the states’ authority as it has been recognized throughout Anglo-American legal history hasnever, ever included the power to radically redefine marriage, rejecting the Judeo-Christian meaning assigned in Scripture and accepted as binding in law and non-legal realms. (More on this in a later Briefing.)
   3. “Social science studies have disproven the hypothesis that gays and lesbians are more likely to abuse children” (Walker opinion, p. 101), This is an absolute statement. It is also fundamentally flawed and oxymoronic. The courts’ reliance on “science” and “social science data” argues that only “hypotheses” provable by applying the “scientific method” to the data under study are “facts.” But that assertion is itself an hypothesis unprovable by the scientific method. Again, Humanists/Reconstructionists fall on their own sword. Their cherished “Ultimate Source” of “facts” is actually just another value judgment serving Humanistic goals.
   4. “Religious beliefs that gay and lesbian relationships are sinful or inferior to heterosexual relationships harm gays and lesbians” (Walker opinion, p. 101). As we noted in our last Court Watch Briefing, the “religious beliefs” which Walker finds so opprobrious are clearly Biblically based, Christian beliefs. This “fact” of “harm” on which Walker focuses is associated with the “legal disadvantages,” “discrimination,” “prejudice against homosexuals,” etc. revealed in the evidence to which Walker gives “judicial notice.”

But this argument commits one of the most widespread and dangerous errors characterizing Humanistic claims on a variety of issues of which homosexual rights are only one, though a most critical, issue. Same-sex marriage bans do indeed distinguish — differentiate — between homosexual couples and heterosexual couples.  BUT to “distinguish or differentiate”between two opposite categories of behavior is not to inherently “discriminate or disadvantage” in an unconstitutional or invalid manner. A long-established principle of our law is that distinctions between groups are not discriminatory if they are reasonable, rooted in reality, etc. [American courts have distorted this standard by dividing it into three levels: the “rational basis test,” the “heightened scrutiny test,” and the “strict scrutiny test.” These are court-contrived, not constitutionally expressed. But all three recognize that governments may distinguish between conduct/groups for valid reasons.] Indeed, all laws, ipso facto, divide that which they govern into categories, groups, etc., and distinguish between those categories for purposes of law.

Thus, the Walkers of America must explain why “religious beliefs” are not a valid basis for law.  But they cannot do this because Walker and Company would have to prove that Scriptural teachings that homosexuality is sinful and wrong are themselves “wrong, invalid, violative of reality, etc. . . .”  And Walker’s own god of science/the social sciences is inadequate to this gargantuan task. Thus, homosexual activists are left with assertions about religious beliefs and science/the social sciences that are themselves non-scientific, i.e., are value judgments. And these Humanistic value judgments certainly cannot be scientifically proven superior to Scriptural teachings against homosexual conduct.

2. Perry/Windsor’s epistemology is AMBIGUOUS. As is obvious from the illustrations above, the Humanistic/Reconstructionist approach to truth and meaning (epistemology) leaves law (and life) in a hopeless and deadly muddle. What we have just seen are the actual out workings of whatSchaefferian scholar Nancy Pearcey has aptly identified as one of the most critical concepts of the contemporary American elite’s basic epistemological position — the “fact/value split.” This split was first identified by Francis Schaeffer as the “upper-lower story split” concerning truth — one of his central themes. 

This dichotomy so dear to homosexual rights activists and other Reconstructionists argues that civil law must be based on “facts” — “neutral, objective, public” propositions that are provable by “science” and its progency, especially “the social sciences.” “Moral and religious views and principles” are inherently “non-facts” — they are “biased, subjective, and private” matters not “provable” by science or the social sciences. Christian views and principles are, therefore, inappropriate as proofs in court proceedings such as Perry/Windsor. They are also relegated to the margins of society, having no role to play in the culture in general, not just in law.

But such an epistemology generates specific results that are, as illustrated in Point #1 above, severely ambiguous. That fact alone renders the fact/value split a dangerous and useless fiction. As the plurality justices inPlanned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey (1992) opined (correctly for once), “Liberty finds no refuge in a jurisprudence of doubt.” The fact/value split thus falls on the same sword that we have identified already.The assertion of the fact/value theory cannot itself be proven by science/the social sciences — cannot be proven to be a “fact.” Additionally, therefore, which “proofs” relevant to a case are “facts” that courts can/should consider and which “proofs” are “values” which courts must ipso facto disregard or specifically reject?

The answers, of course, lie “in the eye of the beholder” — in the views and values of the judge(s) deciding the case. The real conflict in Perry/Windsorand similar cases is that of the whole Culture War conflict — the War of Worldviews between Humanism/Reconstructionism and the Judeo-Christian/Constitutionalist worldview. What is at stake, as Harold Berman demonstrates in his analysis (to which we have been referring), is the “very collapse of our entire Western legal tradition.” The Perry/Windsorepistemology wreaks havoc with the concepts of absolute truth and inherent logic of the Law — key components of the Western legal tradition outlined by Professor Berman. And as Nancy Pearcey of Houston Baptist University’s Schaeffer Center so cogently states, “The clash between these two understandings of morality [the Judeo-Christian v. the Humanistic] will determine whether liberty is gained or lost in the 21st century.  It is imperative to reassert the transcendent moral truths that undergird freedom in every society.”

We will consider Fatal Flaws #3 and #4 in a later Court Watch Briefing.

A Resolution Involving Precinct 32 Committeewoman Patti Anne Lodge

A Resolution Involving Election Qualification

Sponsored By: Blaine County Republican State Committeeman Mitch Hoffman

WHEREAS, District 11 Senator and Precinct 32 Committeewoman Patti Anne Lodge’s residence was removed prior to October 25, 2011, before redistricting was finalized, and

WHEREAS, the homeowner's exemption for 18500 Symms Road, Caldwell, the declared residence of Patti Anne Lodge, was revoked for “no home on this site” on March 21, 2012, and

WHEREAS Patti Anne Lodge has been willfully living at her home at 701 E. Logan Street, Caldwell, which is outside legislative district 11, for over the last two years and has failed to correct the record, and

WHEREAS, Patti Anne Lodge is owner of a house at 21251 Homedale Rd, Caldwell, through her LLC Windridge and chose not to live in District 11, and

WHEREAS, State Senator Patti Anne Lodge violated Article III, section 6 of our state constitution, (“No person shall be a senator or representative who, at the time of his election, is not a citizen of the United States, and an elector of this state, nor anyone who has not been for one year next preceding his election an elector of the county or district whence he may be chosen.”) the Idaho State Republican Party Rules Article IV, Section 8  and Canyon County Bylaws Article III, Section 2, as well as Idaho State Code (ISC) 18:2302, 18-2322, 34-614(2), and 34-624(2), and

WHEREAS, Patti Anne Lodge committed voter fraud by violating ISC18-2322, and

WHEREAS, residence voting exemptions under ISC 34-107 (and under Article VI, section 5 of the State Constitution) do not apply, and

WHEREAS, revocation letters of homeowner exemption, county assessor pictures and records, county permit records  and county clerk records showing physical residences and if people voted in a particular election are public records, and

WHEREAS, the residence of Patti Anne can be challenged under ISC 34-431 where the homeowner's exemption being revoked is an admission by Canyon county of such, and

WHEREAS, Idaho State code under 34-2101(2)(4) and the state constitution disqualifies Patti Anne Lodge for the legislative district 11 senator, and

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE IDAHO REPUBLICAN STATE CENTRAL COMMITTEE:

Direct the Canyon County Chairman to immediately declare the Precinct 32 Committeeman Seat vacant and no longer recognize Patti Anne Lodge as a member of the Canyon County Central Committee.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT:

The Canyon County Assessor, Development Services Department (DSD), Canyon County Clerk and Secretary of State immediately make available all county assessor files and pictures, all DSD permit information and all election information and documents pertaining to Patti Anne Lodge to the Attorney General, the members of the Idaho Senate, any federal entity wishing to investigate the Lodges on voter fraud, the general public, and the press.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT:

The Attorney General under ISC 6-602 pursue prosecution for the usurpation of office of State Senator for Legislative District 11.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT:

The Attorney General and the Secretary of State investigate the practices of the Canyon County Clerk, especially under 18-2301 and 18-2304.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT:

The Idaho Senate consider the preceding information for action under Article III section 11 (expulsion of members), since Patti Anne Lodge is disqualified for office.