[Nobar King]

This is important news, people. Our constitutional rights are being eroded at the hands of the border patrol, who are supposed to be protecting our country from aliens, not harassing the lawful citizens of our country.

Updates on border patrol beating

Pastor beaten, Tasered for defending his rights
But Supreme Court grants agents exception to obeying Constitution
April 18, 2009
By Drew Zahn
© 2009 WorldNetDaily

Pastor Steve Anderson, facial wounds visible

An Arizona pastor – Tasered, bloodied by broken glass and sporting 11 stitches in his head – claims his injuries came from being stopped at a Border Patrol checkpoint 75 miles inside the U.S. and then being battered by police for refusing to allow agents to search his vehicle. The incident earlier this week highlights tension between constitutional rights, the issue of border security and a controversial Supreme Court ruling that grants an exceptional level of police authority near the Mexican border.

Pastor Steven Anderson of Faithful Word Baptist Church in Tempe claims he did nothing to deserve his eventual arrest and believes that when he refused to allow the search of his car he was simply standing up for his Fourth Amendment rights, which protect him against unreasonable search without a warrant. Anderson further questions why the Border Patrol is allowed to stop and search cars at a checkpoint along Interstate 8, 75 miles inland of where the highway nears the Mexican border at Yuma, Ariz. "I was in the United States! I had crossed no international border!" writes Anderson in commentary accompanying a video he made about his experience. "I didn't have any drugs; I didn't have a human beings in my car," he claims in the video itself. "Why is this happening in the United States of America?"

The U.S. Border Patrol, however, explained to WND that Anderson misunderstood his constitutional rights and that because a drug-sniffing dog alerted to Anderson's rental car, the pastor was wrong not to allow the agents to search his vehicle. Ben Vik, a supervisory Border Patrol agent for the Yuma sector, further told WND that the Supreme Court and federal law permit the Border Patrol to establish checkpoints up to 100 miles inside the U.S. and that with probable cause the Fourth Amendment doesn't apply to searches of automobiles. "The Supreme Court found that only minimal intrusion existed to motorists at reasonably located checkpoints," said Vik. "The Supreme Court found that the very brief detention of motorists at a well-marked and identified immigration checkpoint did not constitute an unreasonable search and seizure." Vik's statement, however, doesn't apply to typical law enforcement agencies, but – thanks to a controversial ruling – only to "immigration" checkpoints established by the Border Patrol.

The courts have typically ruled against "suspicion-less" stops and searches of vehicles at police checkpoints, such as the one that detained Anderson. As recently as 2000, the Supreme Court ruled in Indianapolis vs. Edmond that police cannot establish roadblocks staffed by dogs to randomly search automobiles for drugs. "We have never approved a checkpoint program whose primary purpose was to detect evidence of ordinary criminal wrongdoing," the Supreme Court majority wrote in Indianapolis vs. Edmond. "The [Indianapolis] checkpoints violate the Fourth Amendment."
The 1976 United States vs. Martinez-Fuerte decision, however, created an exception allowing the Border Patrol the unique power to establish checkpoints for seeking illegal immigrants, with the secondary purpose of finding drugs. So while Yuma-area police cannot operate a K-9, or drug-detecting dog, checkpoint without violating the Fourth Amendment, the Border Patrol can.

A second exception was also created for drunk driving checkpoints under 1990's Michigan Department of State Police vs. Sitz, but some – including Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas – do not believe the exceptions to the Fourth Amendment are warranted. "I am not convinced that Sitz and Martinez-Fuerte were correctly decided," Thomas wrote in an opinion on the 2000 Indianapolis vs. Edmond decision. "Indeed, I rather doubt that the framers of the Fourth Amendment would have considered 'reasonable' a program of indiscriminate stops of individuals not suspected of wrongdoing."

Graham Boyd, director of the American Civil Liberties Union's Drug Law Reform Project in Santa Cruz, Calif., told the Phoenix New Times that an immigration checkpoint is "thin justification" for sniffing random cars for drugs without a warrant. "Even if somebody has no sympathy for a marijuana user," Boyd says, "you should still be concerned that the U.S. government is saying the border is an area where the U.S. Constitution is suspended."

Senior Patrol Agent Vik assured WND that even in the checkpoints, citizens do maintain certain rights limiting officers' actions. "Border Patrol immigration checkpoints don't give Border Patrol agents carte blanche to automatically search persons or their vehicles," Vik explained. "To conduct a legal search under the Fourth Amendment, agents must develop an articulable probable cause to conduct a lawful search."

In Anderson's case, the pastor claims the K-9 dog made no bark or indication that his rental car was tainted with drugs, while Vik insisted to WND that the dog did alert agents to drugs, thus granting probable cause for the search. Both Anderson and Vik confirm that no contraband was discovered on the vehicle. As for the Tasering and other alleged rough treatment by police, Vik told WND that Anderson was extracted from his car and arrested by Arizona Department of Public Safety officers, not the Border Patrol, a statement Anderson confirms in his video.

The Arizona DPS told WND that an investigation into the officers' actions is ongoing and no comment can be made until it is complete. Anderson spent the evening of his arrest in jail and is awaiting a formal arraignment at which he intends to plead "not guilty."

[Nobar King]

This shows how Christians are targeted and persecuted by the police state:

[Nobar King]

- For Immediate Release -
Friday, April 17, 2009
Arizona Department of Public Safety Statement Concerning the Arrest of Steven L. Anderson
Arrest took place Tuesday, April 14, 2009 at a U.S. Border Patrol Checkpoint
The U.S. Border Patrol asked the Arizona Department of Public Safety to assist their Officers with a combative motorist who refused to cooperate at a checkpoint in the westbound lanes of Interstate 8. Steven L. Anderson, the combative motorist, was arrested by a DPS Officer for resisting a lawful order during the incident and booked into the Yuma County Jail.

Mr. Anderson never filed a complaint with DPS concerning his arrest but instead made a You-Tube video that featured his version of the events of that day.

An investigation by the Arizona Department of Public Safety's Professional Standards Bureau is underway. DPS is looking at current agency policies and procedures that officers must comply with when requested by any agency to respond to checkpoints.
In this particular instance DPS will look at our Officer's response and actions. We will offer no further comment on this incident until the investigation has been concluded.
*It should be noted that in 1976, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of Federal checkpoints near border areas to enforce laws prohibiting illegal immigration. This U.S. Border Patrol checkpoint along Interstate 8 is in compliance with federal law.*

I suspect there will be more 'cover your ass' press releases before the real truth comes out.

[Ezekiel Bathfire]

I have seen this pastor in action; I was reasonably impressed with his preaching, Yet now I see why it is that he has never been invited to Landover. I cannot see why the pastor should have demanded his rights. If you are innocent, you have nothing to fear.

I see three biblical parallels
(a) the dog: Psalms:22:20: Deliver my soul from the sword; my darling from the power of the dog.
(b) the cuts to the forehead: Joh:19:5: Then came Jesus forth, wearing the crown of thorns, and the purple robe. And Pilate saith unto them, Behold the man!
(c ) the whole event: Lu:23:34: Then said Jesus, Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do. And they parted his raiment, and cast lots.

On top of that, wetbacks are all papists – does the pastor really want more servants of the anti-Christ in USA?

[Star Finder]

In NYC, there are tables setup at the entrance to the subway or ferry.

If you wish to board the ferry, or enter the subway, you agree to a search by the police.

You agree, as condition of entry to a public conveyance, to permit the police to search your person and effects.

If not you can walk out and enter somewhere else thank you!!

(of course this is tough when the ferry runs from point a to point b)

This was upheld by a judge.

I have never been searched, because I never carry any effects.

[Pastor Ezekiel]

The worldwide persecution of Christians goes on unabated. This was prophesied in God's Holy Word long ago by God's Prophets, who got it directly from God.

2 Timothy 3:12 "Yea, and all that will live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution."

[Star Finder]

Its not just you wierd Christian sect people. Its everyone!

WAKE UP NON-MILITARIZED PEOPLE!!!

They are taking over and have bigger guns than you do!!!!

[Nobar King]

Steve Anderson is in trouble again for being a U.S. citizen. All Americans should be outraged at the treatment of our citizens. They are treating our own as if they were illegals, and subjecting to unnecessary harassment.

What kind of government would allow this, other than one that is intent on controlling and subjugating the religious?

Pastor Tasering by DPS a Brutal Event on YouTube

By Ray Stern in News
Wednesday, May. 13 2009 @ 8:26AM

Image from Steven Anderson's videoA local pastor left bloodied after refusing to submit to a search at the Interstate 8 Border Patrol checkpoint near Yuma has posted a video of the incident that shows him being Tasered in his car.

The video, posted on YouTube by Steven Anderson, shows Anderson arguing with an Arizona Department of Public Safety trooper through his car's closed window. Someone tells Anderson to close his eyes. The DPS officer then breaks the passenger-side window and shoots the Taser at Anderson. The man squeals in pain as the clicking of the Taser sounds in the background.

At first glance, the use of the Taser seems to violate a policy adopted by most Valley police agencies. When Tasers were first introduced, police used them against suspects who simply refused to obey orders or resisted arrest not by force, but by sitting down or pulling away from an officer's grabbing hands. Such use was later prohibited in most agencies when police realized Tasers could potentially be harmful to some suspects.

However, the DPS could probably make the case that Anderson was a threat to officer safety because he had control of his vehicle. Once the agents and officers decided to pull him out of the car (a questionable decision, itself), they must have decided to Tase him right away to prevent the possibility of the vehicle driving off with an officer stuck in the window.

Anderson claims he was repeatedly Tasered even after being dragged from his car, but that's not shown on his video. Anderson does include surveillance footage he obtained from the government, but the camera angle obscures a full view of the take-down.

I'm not really sure what Anderson's doing wrong to get all this kind of attention.. I go thru these border checks periodically without any problem. Maybe they're singling him out because of bumper stickers on his car?

[Nurse Clampett]

Can't we just invade the Mexican't country and make it part of the Godly USA? There's more of them here than in Mexico anyway, and we wouldn't have the need for boarder patrol.

[Nobar King]

You make it sound like it would be easy. Who is going to deal with the narco-traffickers?

[Nurse Clampett]

Originally Posted by Nobar King

You make it sound like it would be easy. Who is going to deal with the narco-traffickers?

Hypothetically speaking, if we have a complete hostile takeover and eradicate the Mexicans, where would that put most of the cartels?