THE CHURCH MILITANT
Ephesians 5:11-"And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather expose them". This Christian News Blog maintains a one stop resource of current news and reports of its own related to church, moral, spiritual, and related political issues, plus articles, and postings from other online discernment ministries, and media which share the aims to obey the biblical commands to shed light on and refute error, heresy, apostasy, cults, and spiritual abuse.
A riveting account from a nurse in Bavaria Germany you won't hear from the Mainstream media on the invasion going on in Europe by Muslims, who have no intention of assimilating to the culture of the host countries they are invading.
German Citizens Panic, ‘This Is Our Future’ As Muslims March Through City of Hannover
Young Muslims Perform Mock IS Slave Auction in Essen
Published on Oct 23, 2015
Dozens of Muslim activists gathered at Willy Brandt square in Essen to protest against the so-called Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS/ISIL), on Friday. The protesters, dressed like IS militants, were leading a column of women protesters fully covered and chained together. The video shows the group consisting of actors who performed the scene of women slave auction.
Muslim Invaders Demand Obama-Style Freebies
Published on Nov 2, 2015
Alex Jones breaks down how the Islamic "migrants" are being used to destroy Europe and how many of them are nothing but radical soldiers who will then be used as a way to cause chaos when the time is right.
below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
US officials have confirmed today that special forces soldiers will be deployed on the ground in Syria, despite the fact that Obama promised he wouldn’t deploys ‘boots on the ground’.
A senior administration official told the BBC that there will be “fewer than 50” forces deployed in the region to “train, advise and assist” vetted opposition forces.
According to the official, this does not mark a change US strategy, but rather an “intensification” of the campaign in Syria.
White House press secretary Josh Earnest also said that the decision was made by Obama in order to provide additional support for Syrian rebels fighting against the government there.
“There are now moderate opposition forces that are 45 miles (72km) outside Raqqa,” Earnest said. “The president is prepared to intensify the elements that have shown promise.”
He said: “This is an intensification of a strategy he discussed a year ago.”
Something else Obama discussed previously was his decision to not “pursue an open ended action like Iraq or Afghanistan.” He also promised not to send in ‘boots on the ground’ in Syria or pursue an open ended air campaign.
Turns out that was all BULLSHIT… again.
ANOTHER PROMISE BROKEN, BUT YOU BELIEVED HIM LIKE FOOLS:
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
Parents cannot opt their kids out of Common Core-mandated testing in the state of Arizona, according to the state’s attorney general.
Attorney General Mark Brnovich issued this edict in response to a request from the state superintendent of education, Diane Douglas, to clarify whether parents were within their rights under state law to keep their kids from taking the statewide assessment test, known in Arizona as AZMerit.
The AZMerit test — a battery of standardized exams that has come under significant fire in the Grand Canyon State for its futility — is administered annually to the state’s 1.1 million public and charter school students.
Last year, there was a movement among many parents concerned about the potential for data mining and other controversial uses of such tests to boycott them, keeping their kids home from school and the announced test administration days.
One of these groups, OptOutAZ, reported on several significant problems with the statewide assessment tests (and the company that created them) in an information sheet provided for parents who were considering opting their children out of the exams.
For example, OptOutAZ revealed that the test is not unique to Arizona, as had been reported by the state government, but in reality the test
was created by the company AIR (American Institutes for Research) — the same company that created Utah’s and Florida’s Common Core assessments. AIR is a partner of Smarter Balanced who is one of two testing consortia that received $330 million from the U.S. Department of Education to create and administer Common Core tests. So far, the sample test questions are the exact same as Utah’s and Florida’s.
Furthermore, and perhaps most shocking of all, the parental rights advocacy group informed parents that the data obtained by AIR on the AZMerit tests would be stored on databases that are shared with the U.S. Department of Labor.
Also, AIR, the group claims, was recently the victim of a “data breach.” That's hardly reassuring to parents concerned for the safety of their children and their families' private information that could be revealed in answers to questions on the tests, answers inncocently provided by children simply doing what they are told they must do.
All of this should give pause to parents in Arizona with children in public and charter schools.
Regardless of these troubling revelations, the state attorney general says parents have no right to exempt their children from taking the tests.
In a five-page legal opinion published by the Arizona Republic, Brnovich cited state law and case law in support of his statement that parents of children in kindergarten through 12th grade are not legally allowed to opt their kids out of those tests.
"Our conclusion remains the same: parents do not have a legal right to withdraw their children from state-mandated assessments in Arizona's public schools," Brnovic declares.
Brnovich goes on in the letter to point the finger at the state legislature, claiming that lawmakers did not include the right to opt out of assessment tests in the “Parents’ Bill of Rights” enacted in 2010. “The legislature could have included a parental right to exempt a child from statewide assessments, but did not.”
He goes on to explain that the state legislature “limited the authority of parents who choose public education.”
Remarkably, Brnovic cites federal case law in support of his statement that parents have a right to choose where their children are educated, but not how.
Finally, apparently in response to last year’s demonstration of parental repugnance to the statewide assessment tests, Brnovic orders that if students are in school the day the tests are administered, they may not refuse to take them.
As for superintendent Douglas’s response to the attorney general’s legal opinion, the Arizona Republic reports that “Sally Stewart, a spokeswoman for Douglas, responded with a one-line e-mail: ‘We will seek legislation in the next session and ask the federal government for flexibility.’”
Parents of public and charter schools in Arizona are encouraged to contact their state legislators and demand that the unalienable rights of parents be protected and that bureaucrats not be empowered to revoke those rights, forcing students to submit to tests that have been shown to be springboards for greater federal intrusion into the classroom.
Quick, do something! There are John Birch Society types ready to spread “conspiracy theories” from the “margins” into the “mainstream,” and they seem to be hiding under practically every bed in America! At least that's the impression given in a new “intelligence report” by the far-left Southern Poverty Law Center, an organization whose slanderous vitriol against conservatives and Christians was recently implicated in federal court in a recentterrorism case. In its report the SPLC reputedly aims to expose false conspiracy theories that are being churned out by right-wing radicals. But, ironically, while expressing outrage over “conspiracy theories” on the “right,” the SPLC report sounded like an expanded version of Hillary Clinton's bizarre conspiracy theory about a “vast right-wing conspiracy.” To hear the SPLC tell it, practically everyone in America to the right of Obama is participating in a giant conspiracy to spread conspiracy theories. For what purpose is never explained, although apparently it is all very bad for “democracy.”
Though the SPLC clings to a mantle of respectability given to it for claiming to right wrongs, the mainstream American Family Association has labeled the SPLC an “anti-Christian hate group.” Meawhile civil rights attorney and Southern Center for Human Rights President Stephen Bright, echoing investigations and a federal judge, blasted SPLC founder Morris Dees as a "con man and fraud" who exploits naive poor people to enrich himself. In keeping with critics' accusations against the SPLC, the intelligence report reads like it's based on either a fevered imagination or blatant deception, driven by hate against those with whom it disagrees. So far, though, the report has been largely ignored.
But the group's efforts to demonize broad swaths of the American public — essentially anyone less enamored with Big Government than the Obama administration is now in the SPLC's cross-hairs — has led to its loss of influence over public opinion. After labeling mainstream Christian groups supporting traditional marriage as “hate groups,” the SPLC took a major blow. It was also exposed working with the federal government to generally demonize Christians and Jews. Then it attacked presidential candidate Ben Carson over alleged "extremism" for supporting the biblical definition of marriage, sparking outrage across the political spectrum. And the paranoid hysteria is starting to take its toll. Indeed, while the group's every utterance once sparked a cascade of “news” stories in the establishment press, virtually nothing has been reported on the latest ramblings, except by the SPLC and critics eager to ridicule the group.
Infowars, for example, with web traffic levels that dwarf much of the establishment media, seized upon the SPLC's attack against parents who are concerned about Common Core to poke fun at the leftist group. The SPLC labeled Infowars chief Alex Jones, who is one of the top 10 radio talk-show hosts in America, a “hyperventilating conspiracy theorist” for opposing Common Core. The online alternative-media giant, in an article by Kit Daniels, pointed out that most opposition to Common Core is based on its well-documented bad academics, terrible standards, outrageous “math” schemes, and more — not “conspiracy theories.”
The SPLC consistently appears to have trouble with basic terminology, labeling ideas with which it disagrees as “conspiracy theories,” despite the fact that most of the non-theoretical criticism it rails against contains no trace of allegations of “conspiracy.” In a press release about its report, for instance, the SPLC accused Senator Rand Paul (R-Ky.) of embracing a “conspiracy theory” when he blasted Common Core as a “dangerous new curriculum.” But aside from the fact that Paul's statement is not a theory and does not allege a conspiracy, Common Core financier Bill Gates famously agreed that Common Core is driving an entirely new curriculum. “We’ll know we’ve succeeded when the curriculum and the tests are aligned to these [Common Core] standards,” Gates told the National Conference of State Legislatures about his agenda. (Gates was not labeled a conspiracy theorist by the SPLC.)
The SPLC also abuses basic political terminology — perhaps deliberately trying to dupe the press and law enforcement with its claims. For instance, the SPLC report constantly refers to what it dubs the “radical right,” the “far-right,” the “ultra-conservatives,” and more. Yet, when trying to make the “radical right” individuals appear sinister, it compares them to commonly despised radical leftists, such as the National Socialists (Nazis). Interestingly, the reviled leftist groups the SPLC uses for comparison actually favored government intervention in all facets of life, loving Big Government and collectivism almost as much as the SPLC does. The primary difference between the SPLC and the National Socialists surrounds their views on race, but aside from that, a dangerous and deadly anti-liberty ideology of statist and collectivist extremism permeates both to the core.
In fact, if political ideologies were grouped using a legitimate, useful, and traditional political spectrum, National Socialists (Nazis), International Socialists, communists, Marxists, Leninists, fascists, Maoists, and the SPLC and its fellow travelers would all occupy the far left of the political spectrum, which represents ideologies in favor of statism in various forms. On the far-right of the spectrum would be anarchism, an ideology in favor of no government at all. In between — the moderate middle — would include most of the conservative and libertarian groups the SPLC constantly seeks to falsely demonize in the eyes of its supporters, donors, and, more importantly, authorities.
Supporting the view that the SPLC supports overarching government control can be found in the very first paragraphs of the report. It argues, essentially, that politicians and media figures expressing the concerns of their constituents is somehow bad for “democracy”: “Outlandish conspiracy theories may be great for the movies, but they’re highly destructive to our democracy — particularly when mainstream politicians and trusted media figures promote unfounded beliefs that trade knowledge for ignorance and reason for suspicion,” said Mark Potok, editor at the SPLC, in a press release.
And in calling out supposed conservative ignorance, the SPLC highlighted its own failings. Aside from the fact that most of the statement makes no sense, the American government was founded as a constitutional republic in which the rule of law — not the rule of men, as in democracy — would protect the God-given rights of individuals.
Also, ironically, on the SPLC's list of 10 “conspiracy theories” — most of which are neither conspiracies nor theories — is at least one that the SPLC itself was forced to acknowledge had credence. In talking about conservatives' worry that leftists wish to impose martial law to bring about their agenda, the SPLC said, “But there is a real seed from which martial law conspiracy theories, common to both some segments of the far left and especially to the radical right, have grown.... Martial law has been declared in the United States about a dozen times, the most recent after Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans. More to the point, frightening contingency plans for imposing martial law really have been drawn up.” Then it points specifically to Readiness Exercise 1984, or Rex84, “a plan to suspend the Constitution in the event of crises,” and a FEMA chief's discussion of interning 20 million Americans in the event of unrest.
On “internment camps,” the SPLC again outdoes itself. It pretends that anyone concerned about the internment of Americans is a “conspiracy theorist.” Yet, it has happened before in U.S. history, and as the SPLC admits in the same piece, was contemplated by top federal officials even in recent decades. The SPLC also notes that indefinitely interning Americans for their views in camps was recently touted on television by retired general and former Democratic presidential candidate Wesley Clark. As U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia recently pointed out, “You are kidding yourself if you think the same thing [internment of Americans in internment camps] will not happen again.”
About other “conspiracy theories,” too, the SPLC either reveals its own ignorance or passes off deliberate lies. On the prospect of North American political integration into a European Union-style body based on NAFTA, for instance, the SPLC claims: “There is, of course, no such union or plan to merge the three nations into a borderless mass that uses a single currency, the 'Amero.'” In the real world, official U.S. embassy documents leaked by WikiLeaks confirmed that such a plan has been underway for almost a decade at least. Indeed, the document even uses the term “monetary union,” as in, the process used to foist a single currency on Europe. Perhaps the SPLC merely needs better researchers.
Highlighting the wrongness of the SPLC's caims, the late architect of the plot, Robert Pastor at the globalist Council on Foreign Relations, credited The John Birch Society's educational efforts with quashing his North American integration agenda.
The SPLC doubles down on every other issue it highlights. For example, on the Federal Reserve, the outfit blasts critics of the Fed who deride the fact that it virtually caters to the rich and politically connected, yet the SPLC fails to explain how the debt-based fiat monetary system or the privately owned Federal Reserve actually work for the good of the people. On guns, it demonizes fears of a gun-grab as a “conspiracy theory,” even as Obama and Hillary Clinton openly tout Australia's gun-confiscation program as a potential model for America. The SPLC also claims there is no anti-Christian “homosexual agenda” in the same sentence as it outlines its own distorted view of the homosexual agenda — and then suggests that all who oppose this agenda, which would have included Obama (at least based on his public statements) just a few years ago, are part of a vast “anti-gay agenda” conspiracy. Seriously.
In typical SPLC fashion, the most vitriol was reserved for The John Birch Society, the constitutionalist organization that has chapters in all 50 states and works to educate Americans about politics, economics, and culture. It is the parent organization of The New American. The SPLC wrote,“Name a right-wing conspiracy theory of the last 60 years and chances are the John Birch Society was sitting near the front of the bandwagon,” suggesting that it believes the JBS is an integral part of the vast right-wing conspiracy to promote conspiracy theories. In the real world, the JBS deals with truth and education, and has been consistently proven accurate since it was founded in 1958. The SPLC classifies the society as a “Patriot” group, with the word patriot, in SPLC-speak, meaning something negative.
In an e-mail to The New American, JBS CEO Art Thompson responded to the SPLC's attacks:
It is interesting that the SPLC mentions us nine times. It appears that we are the biggest burr under their saddle. The SPLC makes its living and has grown rich by demonizing anything that opposes the march toward socialism in America. They throw in some rather unsavory organizations with responsible organizations and individuals to tar brush all opposition with an image of extremism. Yet the extreme opinions of the SPLC linked to the now-radical Justice Department are helping destroy the American system of local police in favor of a national police. The linkage between the SPLC and the Obama administration has helped create a climate of division in our country when what is needed is neighborliness and harmony in our communities.
Basically everyone appears to be part of the SPLC's imaginary conspiracy to spread “conspiracy theories” from the “margins to the mainstream.” Here is a partial list of the “right-wing” forces demonized in the SPLC's latest manifesto: Texas Governor Greg Abbott, Alaskan politician Sarah Palin, former Fox News host Glenn Beck, “Politicians from around the country and all levels of government, pundits, a large number of Christian Right and anti-LGBT groups,” historian David Barton, Eagle Forum founder Phyllis Schlafly, the American Principles Project, conservative commentator Michelle Malkin, U.S. Representative Jim Bridenstine (R-Okla.), American Policy Center founder Tom DeWeese, U.S. Representative Louie Gohmert (R-Texas), U.S. Senator Ted Cruz (R-Texas), the Republican National Committee, the Constitution Party, former U.S. diplomat and conservative activist Alan Keyes, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.), U.S. Representative Virgil Goode (R-Va.), former Representative Ron Paul (R-Texas), Representative Walter Jones (R-N.C.), former Representative Tom Tancredo (R-Colo.), late Conservative Caucus founder Howard Phillips, WND investigative journalist and best-selling author Jerome Corsi, Media Research Center chief Brent Bozell, Bay Buchanan of Team America, Joan Hueter with the American Council for Immigration Reform, Reverend William Owens with the Coalition of African American Pastors, Ronald D. Ray with the Coalition of American Veterans, Chris Simcox with the Minuteman Civil Defense Corps, Elizabeth Ridenour of the National Council on Bible Curriculum in Public Schools, prominent Jewish attorney David Yerushalmi, anti-sharia activist Pamela Geller, former Texas GOP chief Cathie Adams, the National Rifle Association, NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre, conservative pundit Ann Coulter, Fox News contributor and former Clinton operative Dick Morris, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), Oath Keepers founder Stewart Rhodes, newsman Gary Franchi, American automaker Henry Ford, author and internationally renowned lecturer G. Edward Griffin, The 700 Club host Pat Robertson, Christian Action Network chief Martin Mawyer, Faith2Action founder Janet Porter, former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee, Trail Life USA chief John Stemberger, conservative radio host Janet Mefferd, anti-jihad author Andrew McCarthy, WorldNetDaily, Fox News host Sean Hannity, and even ABC News for good measure.
As the SPLC self-destructs and leaves what remains of its credibility in tatters, Americans might find it illuminating to read its report, then research each of the “conspiracy theories” highlighted by the SPLC. Of course, the outfit often throws in “straw man” arguments to “debunk,” instead of addressing actual concerns of conservatives. But wading through the propaganda and discovering the truth is hardly difficult — and would be a very useful exercise for most Americans.
The fact is that, while the SPLC may not want readers to believe it, history has been strongly influenced by groups of individuals working together for nefarious purposes — the very definition of conspiracy. Just this month, the Obama administration charged former United Nations General Assembly President John Ashe and various Chinese communists with a criminal “conspiracy.” Yet, the SPLC did not identify the Obama Justice Department as a right-wing conspiracy theorist. Anyone who does not acknowledge that conspiracies abound either has no understanding of history and current events, or is trying to play you for a fool.
There is indeed a real danger to American values and constitutional government from groups such as the SPLC and its allies — including the increasingly lawless Obama administration, which is now partnering with the radical group to target Christians, conservatives, dissidents, and others the SPLC hates. Numerous other outfits are participating in the assault on U.S. sovereignty and liberty, as this magazine has documented extensively over a period of decades. But if enough Americans were educated on the facts, Congress could defund the agenda, leaving the marginalized SPLC to spew its hatred and paranoid conspiracy theories harmlessly until its giant endowment runs dry or it runs out of tinfoil.
Jerald c. Finney Mail: P.O. Box 1346 ; Austin TX 78767 Office : 700 Lavaca, Suite 1400, Austin TX Phone (512) 785-8445 (C) ; 512-808-5529 (O) ; 512-385-0761 (H) E-MAIL:jerald.finney@sbcglobal.net Website : « Separation of Church and State Law » (jeraldfinney.wordpress.com)
10/30/2015
E-Mail to the following:
David Wilske Patrol Lieutenant for the University of Minnesota Police Department 511 Washington Ave. SE Suite No. 1 Minneapolis MN 55455 wilsk001@umn.edu
Inspector Katherine Waite Commander of the 2nd Precinct 1911 Central Avenue N.E. Minneapolis, MN 55418 (612) 673-5702 Fax (612) 370-3885 police@ci.minneapolis.mn.us
Mayor Betsy Hodges 350 S. 5th St., Room 331 Minneapolis, MN 55415 Phone: (612) 673-2100
City Attorney (Called but the answerer could not give me the name of the city attorney-gave me the e-mail address below) City Hall, Room 210 350 S. 5th St. Minneapolis, MN 55415 (612) 673-2010 policereview@minneapolismn.gov
RE: Advance notice concerning protected speech within the jurisdiction of UMPD by the men of the OPBC Street Preaching Ministry in a sincere effort to avoid the need for federal civil rights lawsuit.
Dear Lieutenant Wilske:
I am writing this letter as a member of Old Paths Baptist Church (“”OPBC”) in Northfield Minnesota. I am in the process of moving to Faribault, Minnesota from Austin Texas where I practice law.
You and I have talked about this matter. As you know, I am addressing this matter in advance to avoid the eventuality that your peace officers have not been properly educated in dealing with situations where citizens are exercising their right to freedom of speech as guaranteed by the United States Constitution, the Constitution of the State of Minnesota, and by the Anoka City Code. You may have already educated your peace officers since our discussions began; but, as I have pointed out and provided to you the link to the online video of the incident, at least one of your officers has violated the civil rights of the peaceful speech activities of the men of OPBC street preaching ministry.
Some members of OPBC will, from time to time, be exercising their First Amendment speech rights in Dinkeytown, as they have done in the past. In their past activity, the police officer did not understand the law and therefore violated the rights of the street preachers. As I have pointed out to you, the federal courts, all the way to the top, have for a long time laid out the law in these matters. Now, a case which is precisely on point was just handed down by the United States Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals. You can go to the following article for all the details of concerning this matter, including a link to the video of the offending officer in action, as well as a link to the opinion in the October 28, 2015 Sixth Circuit case.
On October 28, 2015, the U.S. Sixth Circuit restated and strengthened First Amendment protection of speech in the public forum in a case where “Bible Believers” involved in street preaching to Muslims displayed a pigs head, amongst other direct speech. The Sixth Circuit stressed that the First Amendment “envelops all manner of speech, even when that speech is loathsome in its intolerance, designed to cause offense, and, as a result of such offense, arouses violent retaliation.” Attorney Robert Muise of the American Freedom Law Center, who argued the case on behalf of the Bible Believers, applauded the decision, saying it was “solidly on the side of free speech.” “If this went the other way, it would incentivize violence as a legitimate response to free speech, and that is wrong in our country,” Muise said. “Any freedom-loving American enjoys protections of the First Amendment.”The Sixth Circuit said, “(The ruling) affirms the rule of law that when a violent mob is responding violently to protected speech, the police’s duty is to protect the speaker and not join that mob that is intent in suppressing the speech,” Muise said. “Today, the First Amendment was the victor.”Click here to go directly to the opinion. Article: Anti-Muslim Slurs Get Legal Protection(102915).
The defendants in the above mentioned case were: WAYNE COUNTY, MICHIGAN; BENNY N. NAPOLEON, in his official capacity as Sheriff, Wayne County Sheriff’s Office; DENNIS RICHARDSON, individually and in his official capacity as Deputy Chief, Wayne County Sheriff’s Office; MIKE JAAFAR, individually and in his official capacity as Deputy Chief, Wayne County Sheriff’s Office.
The case now goes back to a federal judge in Detroit, who will decide what damages the “Bible Believers” are entitled to.
That case should make clear the duty of peace officers in America to protect the speaker and the speech in the public forum. As well, the case points out the limits of the speech activity and actions of the speakers and much more.
As we have discussed before the above mentioned ruling, speech in the public forum is protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, the Constitution of the state of Minnesota, and by your City Code. The people of Old Paths Baptist Church were well aware of what the Supreme Court has ruled concerning speech in the public forum. For example, on the “Separation of Church and State Law” website you will find the tract Street Preaching in America – Is it Legal? (https://jeraldfinney.wordpress.com/b-messages-from-pastor/street-preaching/tract-street-preaching-in-america-is-it-legal/ ). Some of the members, especially the leaders, have copies of and have studied that tract and other materials. I believe you may find the tract useful in that it covers the hierarchy of the relevant law from the highest to the lowest. For that tract, the lowest law was the Northfield, Minnesota Code of City Ordinances and Charter.
I discussed this with Pastor Jason Cooley. He tried to call you, but you were unavailable. After several attempts, he told me to take care of it since he is very busy with several projects (preachers 3 times a week, does 2 online broadcasts each week, street preaches, has family responsibilities, etc.).
Accordingly, in order to attempt to prevent the necessity of Civil Rights suit in federal court, I am sending this notification to you and other city officials given in the heading. The law makes clear that it is the job of peace officers to protect public speakers and speech engaged in First Amendment protected activities. Should another police officer behave as did the officer in the video, the only remedy will be costly (to the defendants, including the taxpayers of the county, the officers involved, and the officials who should have educated and supervised those officers or who should have made sure that the officers were properly educated and supervised). The men of the OPBC Street Preaching Ministry sincerely hope that court action not be called for since they would rather spend their time communicating the Gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ instead of fighting a battle which has already been fought and won.
I am sure that City Attorney Tony Palumbo is aware of the law in these matters. I would also hope that Chief Philip Johanson is as well. My concern is that all of the officials of the city as well as all law enforcement personnel and especially those who will be working the “Grand Day Parade” know the law and are prepared to enforce it. Their job is to protect all citizens, including those citizens involved in protected speech. They cannot properly do their job without knowing the law.
The men of OPBC have already had to confront other cities and towns for violation of the First Amendment. You may find some of their triumphant trials and tribulations as well as the latest law at:
So far, every city and town where a problem has arisen concerning the public speech by the men of OPBC has now educated their law enforcement personnel and no lawsuit has been necessary. Here in Austin, Texas, peace officers are well educated in the law. I was involved in a street preaching ministry here for 19 years and the police always protected us because they have been educated in the relevant law since all kinds of activists regularly communicate (speech, signs, symbols, tracts, etc.) in the public forum. They protected us and informed disruptive citizens of the law of free speech in America. On one occasion, a man who assaulted me was detained by the police. He lied and said I assaulted him. The police told me what he said but also said that they saw the whole thing and said I could file charges. I told them that I did not wish to do so. I could tell you numerous other stories of the great job the police in Austin, Texas do in upholding the law and protecting those who speak in the public forum.
The men of OPBC always endeavor to settle matters peaceably and according to the law. They do not wish to try to respectfully educate peace officers (sometimes very rude and obnoxious peace officers – see some of the encounters linked to on the website pages above) who are not acting according to the law. They do not wish to spend time in filing and executing lawsuits against offending officials (individual peace officers, county and city attorneys, mayors, city council members, and the cities in general) for matters which are well settled in the law. They have no desire to cost those people and the tax paying citizens unnecessary expense. I am sure you would rather use the city taxpayer money for other matters. Even more important, I am sure you wish to properly honor the law and to protect innocent persons who are peaceably exercising their rights under that law. In the event a lawsuit is necessary, OPBC has already contacted lawyers who will be ready and able to go to court in Minnesota.
Several cameras will be in use by the people of OPBC so that should false charges or accusations be made, or should lawsuit(s) be necessary, the facts will be protected from lies or misunderstandings.
Please educate your police officers and other city officials who may be involved in the Parade Day events as to law concerning speech in the public forum in America. OPBC desires to have a good working relationship with the officials and all citizens of Anoka.
Again, on the above webpages, you will find other legal resources, positive and negative encounters with police officers linked to on Youtube, etc. which may help you as you look at this matter.
