Category Archives: news

Court Rules Against Dayton-Based Investment Firm In Fraud Case

An agreed preliminary and permanent injunction was approved yesterday between the Division of Securities and Wayne T. Essex and his companies (Essex and Associates, Inc. in Dayton, Essex HR & Associates, Inc. in Beavercreek, and HR Reconciliation, LLC in Dayton.) The injunction prohibits Essex and his companies from:

– selling or offering to sell securities in violation of the Ohio Securities Act
– selling or offering to sell securities without prior approval of the court
– engaging in any deceptive, fraudulent or manipulative act.

Montgomery County Common Pleas Court Judge Mary Wiseman signed the injunction. In December 2011, Judge Wiseman issued a temporary restraining order against Essex and his companies. The judge also appointed as receiver James Swaim of the Dayton law firm of Flanagan, Lieberman, Hoffman & Swaim. The receiver is working to recover Essex’s business assets for distribution as approved by the court.

The Division of Securities initiated the action based on allegations that Essex sold promissory notes in the Dayton Small Business Capital Fund, which he told investors would be invested in Dayton-area small businesses. Twenty investors purchased approximately $1.1 million in the fraudulent investment from July 6, 2010 – November 23, 2011. Essex never made loans to or investments in small businesses with the money, the State charged.

The Division’s investigation found that Essex sold securities without a license, sold unregistered securities and engaged in securities fraud. The Division also found that Essex commingled investor funds with his business and were used to support his personal lifestyle, including out-of-state travel.

Essex did not tell investors that he was not licensed to sell securities and that the securities were not properly registered. Essex told investors that their funds were guaranteed and that they would receive annual returns of five, seven or 10 percent – with higher rates to those who invested larger dollar amounts.

American Muslim Organization Backs NYPD and Chief Kelly Efforts to Fight Islamist Radicalization

Dr. M. Zuhdi Jasser, a devout Muslim and the president and founder of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy (AIFD) issued the following statement regarding the vicious and malignant attack by the New York Times and the Council for American Islamic Relations (CAIR) on the NYPD and Chief Raymond Kelly:

“The American Islamic Forum for Democracy unequivocally supports the efforts of the New York Police Department and its Commissioner Raymond Kelly to fight the insidious ideology of militant Islamism. The NYPD has been an international leader in this fight and has paid a heavy price for being at the forefront of the ideological war that must be waged. Lost in the shoddy and biased reporting was the most basic fact that NYPD’s counter-terrorism programs have protected New Yorkers and Americans from a vast number of increasing threats like Faisal Shahzad, the Time Square Bomber, who embodies the radicalization described in the Third Jihad.

This week’s attacks on the NYPD and now Chief Kelly are yet another example of the depths of deception that groups such as CAIR are willing to go in order to suppress any criticism of the organization. This attack has nothing to do with the rights of American Muslims and everything to do with the efforts of CAIR to use American Muslims as a tool to suppress dissent and frame our communities as victims of American society.

The editorial board and reporter Michael Powell of The New York Times should be ashamed of themselves. They have abandoned any journalistic standards in their factless regurgitation of the CAIR mantra. The New York Times seems to care little about genuine Muslim diversity or addressing the root causes of terrorism. This latest attack is simply part of a systematic attempt to dismantle the efforts of NYPD to address the root causes of radicalization within American Muslim communities.

In 2007 the NYPD released a landmark report entitled Radicalization in the West: The Homegrown Threat. This report was a seminal piece of research now used around the world on how radicalization occurs. As an American Muslim I embraced this research as a blueprint which Muslims should have initiated to confront the threat knocking on the door of our communities every day. Groups like CAIR saw it as an opportunity to drive a wedge between American Muslims and law enforcement and to preach a victim mindset within our community. Interestingly the behaviors that CAIR is illustrating are eerily similar to the models laid out in the NYPD report.

The story that the New York Times ran this week is over a year old. It didn’t gain momentum last year primarily because it is an insignificant story and its merits paled in comparison to world-wide attention brought to bear on the revolutions in Egypt which erupted shortly thereafter. America’s attention span for the Middle East has worn thin and when a new kernel of information was released CAIR seized that opportunity to reignite the furor. The “shocking” evidence was that 1,500 NYPD officers saw a film that is readily available to the general public and probably already viewed by millions.

This effort by CAIR is a blatant attempt to punish the NYPD and Chief Kelly for doing their job and to strike fear in the heart of anyone that does legitimate work in exposing their lifeblood of Islamism. Political correctness has made mere claims of discrimination and racial bias irrefutable and removed the ability for Americans to have honest discourse on religious issues. The Third Jihad is not anti-Islam or anti-Muslim. If it were I would not have been a part of it.

“It was an opportunity for me, said Jasser, “to speak with co-religionists about the threat that exists to our children and our very way of life. It is a wake-up call for our community to accept our responsibility to fight against an ideology within our communities that seeks to strip us of our Constitutional freedoms. CAIR’s victimization of American Muslims emboldens that sinister ideology.”

————————-

The American Islamic Forum for Democracy (AIFD) is a nonprofit 501(c)(3) charitable organization. AIFD’s mission advocates for the preservation of the founding principles of the United States Constitution, liberty and freedom, through the separation of mosque and state. For more information on AIFD, please visit our website at http://www.aifdemocracy.org.

Two Initiatives Pushing For Medical Marijuana In Ohio

Two separate groups have been given the go-ahead by the state ballot board to begin collecting the signatures needed to put a constitutional amendment that would legalize medical marijuana on the November ballot.

The Ohio Medical Cannabis Amendment of 2012 is backed primarily by patients, advocates and business people and would leave most decisions on regulating the drug to a state commission.

The Ohio Alternative Treatment Amendment is backed primarily by the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws, which advocates nationally for the complete legalization of the drug, and includes much more detail about regulations on how much marijuana could be obtained, who could grow it and where it could be distributed.

Supporters of both amendments have indicated that they expect the two versions to be reconciled into a single amendment before being placed on the ballot.

originally published in the Ohio Health Policy Review, January 27, 2012.

Hungary Defies Critics With New Family Law

By Susan Yoshihara, Ph.D.

(New York – C-FAM) Hungarian leaders have passed a law protecting the traditional family, defying ongoing criticism that their new constitution would curtail abortion and homosexuality.

The new law says the family, based upon marriage of a man and a woman whose mission is fulfilled by raising children, is an “autonomous community…established before the emergence of law and the State” and that the State must respect it as a matter of national survival. It says “Embryonic and foetal life shall be entitled to protection and respect from the moment of conception,” and the state should encourage “homely circumstances” for child care. It obliges the media to respect marriage and parenting and assigns parents, rather than the State, primary responsibility for protecting the rights of the child. The law enumerates responsibilities for minors, including respect and care for elderly parents.

The purpose of the law is “to create a predictable and safe regulatory environment for family protection and the promotion of family welfare, and to enforce the Fundamental Law,” the nation’s new constitution, which came into force on January 1st and was passed by a vote of 262-44 last April.

The Fundamental Law nullified Hungary’s communist-era constitution and dates its democracy from the revolution against the Soviet Union in 1956 and Soviet collapse in 1990. Hungary is the last Central European nation to pass a post-communist constitution.

The constitution calls for the protection of life from conception and bans torture, human trafficking, eugenics, and human cloning. It recognizes marriage as the “conjugal union of a man and a woman.”

Amnesty International said the article protecting life from conception could “undermine the rights of women and girls” that are “enshrined in several treaties signed and ratified by the Republic of Hungary such as the Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) and the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC).” The group said the article defining marriage “may pave the way to the introduction of an explicit ban on same-sex marriages which contravenes international and European anti-discrimination standards…enshrined by Article 23 of the ICCPR [the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights].”

Human Rights Watch likewise invoked UN human rights treaties in a letter urging Hungary’s president to “amend the constitution to ensure respect for women’s reproductive rights.” The human rights goliath expressed concern that the non-discrimination clause for “race, color, sex, disability, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, wealth, birth or any other circumstance whatsoever” excludes reference to sexual orientation or gender identity which they said was guaranteed in the ICCPR.

International legal experts have dismissed the claims of the human rights groups saying Hungary has the right to pass a constitution without interference. They point out that no UN treaty even mentions abortion, sexual orientation, or gender identity and that the UN General Assembly has never accepted such redefinitions.

European legal expert Roger Kiska sees the new Hungarian laws as part of a growing trend among European states to push back at such interpretations and protect human life and the family. Former US ambassador to Hungary Mark Palmer said the expulsion of Hungary from the EU is “now no longer unthinkable,” but Hungarian analyst Julia Lakatos downplayed the controversy, telling CSMonitor, “Much of the criticism from abroad is exaggerated.”

Susan Yoshihara is Senior Vice President for Research at the Catholic Family & Human Rights Institute (C-FAM). This article first appeared in the Friday Fax, an internet report published weekly by C-FAM, a New York and Washington DC-based research institute (http://www.c-fam.org/). This article appears with permission.

CCV Action Endorses Senator Rick Santorum

CCV Action endorses Senator Rick Santorum for the Republican Party candidate for president of the United States. After careful deliberation and research of the candidates, there is no question that Senator Rick Santorum holds closest to CCV Action’s core values of sanctity of life, marriage, and religious freedom.

Santorum’s Catholicism Attacked

In a recent statement to the press, Catholic League president Bill Donohue made the following comments about recent attacks on presidential candidate Rick Santorum’s religion:

Rick Santorum is deserving of closer scrutiny now that he is a top contender for the Republican nomination, but this does not justify either misrepresenting, or attacking, his faith.

John Gehring of Faith in Public Life fails to distinguish between the official teachings of the Catholic Church and the expressed opinions of some Church leaders, thus allowing him to paint Santorum as out of step with his religion. How interesting. Gehring works for an organization that receives approximately a quarter of its money from George Soros. Need I say more? So discount this guy.

Santorum has also been attacked by Steve Kornacki at Salon for his “Catholic-infused opposition to abortion.” It may come as a shock to Kornacki that the late Christopher Hitchens was also pro-life, and that Nat Hentoff is proudly pro-life today. Their atheism hardly accounts for their understanding of Biology 101.

The blogsite Huffpost Hill says, “Santorum thinks the Catholic Church isn’t conservative enough, which is kind of like thinking Megadeth doesn’t thrash hard enough.” Guess that means Santorum is a very Catholic kind of guy (Megadeth is a heavy metal band—I had to look it up). Should Santorum therefore be disqualified? Irin Carmon at Salon no doubt thinks so: “Rick Santorum is coming for your contraception.” Probably around midnight.

Linda Hirshman, also at Salon, is having a stroke: “That an advocate of legislating strict Roman Catholic sexual doctrine came within eight votes of winning…warrants attention.” Yeah, if this Catholic makes it to the White House, he’ll seek stimulus money for mandatory chastity belts.

Let’s face it, the left want a religious test for president—they want to exclude all religious candidates. Which explains their love affair with Obama.

[Blogger Note: Do Americans still remember President John F. Kennedy, a Catholic Democrat? Maybe America needs another Catholic President this time. Maybe the the Republican party should count its blessing in that it is getting the real deal–a conservative and a Catholic.]

Rutherford Institute Files FOIA Request Asking FBI to Reveal if and Why Christian Street Preacher was Placed on Terrorist Watch List

WASHINGTON, D.C. – The Rutherford Institute has filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request on behalf of a Christian street preacher believed to have been placed on the Terrorist Watch List based on his religious views. Inclusion on the FBI’s terrorist watch list, which is a secret list maintained by the government, can hamper one’s ability to travel and can result in heightened governmental surveillance. According to information provided to The Rutherford Institute, the FBI has been conducting a secret investigation into the associations and activities of street preacher Michael Marcavage. In an earlier letter to FBI Director Robert Mueller, John W. Whitehead, president of The Rutherford Institute, called on the agency head to either cease the FBI’s investigation of Michael Marcavage, a street preacher well known for publicly exercising his First Amendment rights to free speech and religious expression, or make known the charges being made against him.

The Rutherford Institute’s letter to FBI Director Robert Mueller is available at www.rutherford.org.

“Michael Marcavage deserves to know why he is under investigation and whether he has, in fact, been placed on the FBI’s terrorist watch list. However, if, as we suspect, Marcavage is guilty of nothing more than engaging in nonviolent religious speech which government officials perceive as controversial, then the government has clearly overstepped its constitutional bounds,” said John W. Whitehead, president of The Rutherford Institute. “This sort of secret investigation, which is antithetical to the principles of a free society, has a chilling and deleterious effect on the ability of all Americans to exercise their First Amendment right to free speech.”

Christian street preacher Michael Marcavage, the director of an evangelism ministry whose mission is the public proclamation of the Gospel, regularly travels the country preaching in traditional public forums, distributing Christian literature, and engaging passersby in discussions about the Christian faith. Marcavage recently learned that the FBI has been requesting “interviews” with his friends and associates in order to interrogate them about his activities. Subsequently, a reliable source informed Marcavage that he was the object of an FBI investigation and that his name had been added to the FBI’s terror watch list, the Terrorist Screening Database, based on his alleged affiliation with an anti-abortion group known as the “Army of God.” Inclusion on the terrorist watch list, which is a secret list maintained by the government, can hamper one’s ability to travel and can result in heightened governmental surveillance.

Concerned that his placement on such a list could have a chilling effect on his expressive activities, Marcavage asked The Rutherford Institute to intervene on his behalf. Writing to Mueller, Whitehead pointed out that under Homeland Security Presidential Directive 6 (HSPD-6), in order to be placed on the terrorist watch list, an individual must be known to be a terrorist or must be reasonably suspected of being a terrorist. Moreover, Marcavage, who has devoted himself to peaceful advocacy and who has never been involved in terrorism nor associated with any terrorist organizations, including the so-called Army of God, does not meet the criteria laid out in Directive 6. In filing a FOIA request with the FBI, Institute attorneys have asked the FBI to provide any information relating to Marcavage’s possible inclusion on databases or lists of individuals suspected of advocating terrorism or other unlawful acts.

TMLC Appeals Ninth Circuit’s Anti-God Decision to the U.S Supreme Court

ANN ARBOR, MI – The Thomas More Law Center announced today that it has appealed a controversial decision of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals to the U.S. Supreme Court. The appeal was filed in the case of Bradley Johnson v. Poway Unified School District late last week.

For the past twenty-five years, Bradley Johnson, a high school math teacher at the Poway School District located in California had been displaying red, white and blue banners in his classroom that contained patriotic phrases such as: “In God We Trust, ” “One Nation Under God, ” and “God Bless America.”

He displayed the banners pursuant to a 30-year school district policy that permitted teachers to maintain classroom displays of non-curricular messages that reflected their personal opinions and values. In effect, the school district designated classroom walls as forum for the expression of the teacher’s private opinions and viewpoints.

However, in 2007 school officials ordered Johnson to remove his banners because they promoted a “Judeo-Christian” viewpoint.

In an outrageous case of double standard, school officials allowed other teachers to display non-Christian religious displays in their classrooms. These displays included a 40-foot string of Tibetan prayer flags with images of Buddha hung across a classroom, a poster with Hindu leader Mahatma Gandhi’s “7 Social Sins;” a poster of Muslim leader Malcolm X; a poster of the Buddhist leader Dali Lama; and a poster containing the lyrics of John Lennon’s anti-religion song “Imagine, ” which begins, Imagine there’s no Heaven.

As a result, the Thomas More Law Center, a national public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, Michigan, which defends the religious liberty of Christians, filed a federal lawsuit against the school district on behalf of Johnson.

On September 4, 2008, Federal District Judge Robert T. Benitez agreed with the Thomas More Law Center. He ruled that “Johnson was simply exercising his free speech rights on subjects that were otherwise permitted in the limited public forum created by Defendants” and that there was an “ongoing violation of his First Amendment free speech rights.”

However, the Poway School District appealed the ruling and a three judge panel of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed Judge Benitez’s decision ruling that the school district was justified in removing banners that mentioned God, while leaving untouched the Tibetan Prayer flags and the images of Buddha.

Richard Thompson, President and Chief Counsel of the Law Center, commented, “This case is a prime example of how public schools across our nation are cleansing our classrooms of our Christian heritage while promoting atheism and other non–Christian religions under the guise of cultural diversity.”

Continued Thompson, “The Ninth Circuit Court’s rationale in allowing the Tibetan Prayer Flags and references to other religions while outlawing America’s patriotic slogans that mention God is unconvincing. Brad Johnson was simply exercising his free speech rights in a forum created by the school district to inform students of the religious foundations of our nation.”

Attempts to get a rehearing in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals failed, and so the Law Center pursued its only remaining option– a Petition for a Writ of Certiorari (appeal) to the United States Supreme Court.

Local Teacher Nominated for Special Recognition

(Dayton, OH) – Kelsey Woodward, Senior at Northmont High School, believes Ms. Janelle Hayes is one special teacher. Like students in schools all over the Miami Valley, Kelsey knows her teacher has made a real difference in her life and thinks it’s about time great teachers like Ms. Hayes got some much deserved recognition. Kelsey wants to do something about that and has nominated her Spanish teacher for the Heroic Teacher of the Year award.

The Heroic Teacher of the Year contest was initiated to honor teachers who have distinguished themselves within their school and community through generosity and commitment while putting the needs of students before their own. Besides recognition for exceptional accomplishments, each winner will receive a $200 gift card to their favorite bookstore and an Engage Wireless LCD; an exciting new interactive teaching tool for the classroom, courtesy of UWrite Touch.

The contest was inspired by the ground-breaking novel Leave No Child Behind by Dr. Randy Overbeck, winner of the 2011 Thriller of the Year Award from ReadersFavorite.com. The book tells a story of heroism, when a small-town teacher is confronted by an act of terrorism that threatens her classroom and school.

“After many years as an educator, I hope, as an author, to bring some recognition to those educators who have the willingness to stand up for students and believe in kids who may not even believe in themselves,” the author says.

This contest is sponsored by Heroic Teacher Press, an independent publishing company based in Lebanon, Ohio, and UWrite Touch, an educational technology company. The small press is also working with local booksellers like “Chapters:Pre-Loved Books” in Lebanon to find and recognize outstanding teachers.

“The mission of Heroic Teacher Press is to raise the status of teachers in America and all the company efforts focus on that,” says Overbeck, a former teacher, college professor and school administrator. “This contest is designed to highlight real life teachers that are largely going unrecognized by the general public.”

In her nomination, Kelsey writes Ms. Hayes’ teaching “will have a lifetime impact on the person I become.” And Kelsey’s not alone. Other students are invited to nominate their favorite teacher for the award. Parents, colleagues and supervisors are also welcomed to submit a nomination of a deserving K-12 educator for the recognition. Nomination forms and full details are available online at www.heroicteacherpress.com or by sending a stamped, self-addressed envelope to Attn: Heroic Teacher Contest, 789 Lake Bluff Ct., Lebanon, OH 45036. Information on the contest is also available at participating bookstores.

In 9-0 Ruling in US v. Jones, U.S. Supreme Court Declares Warrantless GPS Use by Police Unconstitutional

WASHINGTON, D.C.—In a unanimous ruling in United States v. Jones, the U.S. Supreme Court has declared that police must get a search warrant before using GPS technology to track criminal suspects. Insisting that individuals have a reasonable expectation that they will not be subject to constant monitoring by the government, and that escalating secretive technological surveillance violates an individual’s reasonable expectation of privacy, The Rutherford Institute had filed an amicus curiae brief in the case.

“We have entered a new and frightening age when advancing technology is erasing the Fourth Amendment,” said John W. Whitehead, president of The Rutherford Institute. “Thankfully, in recognizing that the placement of a GPS device on Antoine Jones’s Jeep violated the Fourth Amendment’s protection against unreasonable search and seizure, the U.S. Supreme Court has sent a resounding message to government officials—especially law enforcement officials—that there are limits to their powers.”

In September 2005, without Antoine Jones’s knowledge or consent, police placed a GPS device on the undercarriage of Jones’ Jeep vehicle while it was parked in a public lot in Maryland. GPS devices use orbiting satellites to produce accurate and continuous records of their position and of any person or object carrying the devices. Consequently, over the course of four weeks, police were able to monitor Jones’ movements and actions as he drove his vehicle. Based upon the detailed information obtained about Jones’ movements, police arrested and charged Jones with conspiracy to distribute drugs.

Prior to trial, Jones moved to suppress the evidence obtained using the GPS monitoring, arguing that because the police had violated the terms of a court order allowing the placement of the GPS device on his vehicle, the evidence was obtained without a warrant in violation of the Fourth Amendment’s protection against unreasonable searches and seizures. The trial court rejected Jones’ motion to suppress. However, on appeal, the D.C. Court of Appeals held that the use of the GPS device to track Jones and the evidence obtained constituted an illegal search in violation of the Fourth Amendment. Additionally, the Court of Appeals rejected the government’s claim that no violation of Jones’ privacy had taken place because the evidence pertained to Jones’ movements while he was in public.