Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Yamato

Citizen of Israel vs Nazi Checkpoint

599 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Sir Wearer of Hats

Yes he did use that one. Where did he "lie"? When the agent asked him questions he didn't answer them. That is exercising your right to remain silent. As if, he just sat there, and didn't say a word, and didn't speak English, then they'd be less suspicious he's an illegal alien? Come on man you're better than that.

He didn't say "No" when they asked him if he was an American citizen. He refused to answer their questions.

Federal agents need to secure the border. Policing the states is the states' job. It's obvious he's not an illegal immigrant. First of all he's not immigrating. He's in a licensed vehicle from Arizona that's up to date. They have no reason to suspect him of immigrating. Using immigration as their excuse was BS. If everyone driving a car 50 miles from the border is a suspect of illegal immigration then everyone 50 miles from a bar is suspect of drunk driving. By not getting the importance of exercising your rights, you in effect enable police to do anything for any reason. You enable the police state.

Let's review another checkpoint refusal:

Anderson: "What's up man?"

Agent: "How are you doing today sir?"

Anderson: "Good."

Agent: "Are you a U.S. citizen?"

Anderson: "That's my business."

Agent: "Well, it's our business to ask. Are you a U.S. citizen or not?"

Anderson: "You can ask, that's fine."

Agent: "Well you have to answer or I'll have to detain you until you can either tell me..."

Anderson: "Well, I don't have to answer because I have rights as an American."

Fast forward to present day.

"This is where I draw the line, when I have to go through three checkpoints within 90 minutes, just to drive to work -- that tells me I'm living in a police state," he said.

Back to the video:

Anderson: "I didn't know I had to go around proving that I'm a citizen. Do I need to like show my papers like Nazis?"

Border Patrol agents then asked him to pull off to the side of the road.

Anderson: "No thank you."

Agent: "I want you to pull over sir."

Anderson: "No thanks. I want to go free on my way."

And even though he refused to comply, he was let go.

Anderson: "Go ahead and go where?"

Agent: "On the road."

Anderson: "See ya later."

http://www.myfoxphoe...r-border-patrol

You think Anderson is wrong for doing this? Why?

I think Anderson was and is doing it not for the enlightened ideals you ascribe to him.

"Are you an American citizen?" he could have said "yeap" and had some pride in the ideals of his nation, instead he chose to make an issue of it - ohh so politely though - by saying "that's my business" using those ideals to further his own agenda.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yamato

I said "Even if they were unlawfully...". This is a figure of speech.

What you said that's relevant is "Well, I believe those officers infringed his rights." You're spinning yourself dizzy.

I am not a US citizen, I am a citizen of Israel (paraphrased) is not a straight out lie?

Where did he say "I am not a US citizen"? You're BS.

I think Anderson was and is doing it not for the enlightened ideals you ascribe to him.

"Are you an American citizen?" he could have said "yeap" and had some pride in the ideals of his nation, instead he chose to make an issue of it - ohh so politely though - by saying "that's my business" using those ideals to further his own agenda.

He's exercising his rights, whatever else you think he's doing. We can find an agenda in every single discussion on this forum bar none. What agenda is better than exercising your rights?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
FLOMBIE

What you said that's relevant is "Well, I believe those officers infringed his rights." You're spinning yourself dizzy.

That was about the officers that were beating him up. I am talking you dizzy.

Where did he say "I am not a US citizen"? You're BS.

You are right, he did not say that. Only I am a citizen of Israel, which is a lie, nonetheless

It's late, mate. I'm off. My points stay, yours crumble away. Point out how his rights are infringed in this very video, and I continue this conversation tomorrow. If you can't, I am done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
some new guy

You should maybe find out alittle about the guy before you make assumptions. This isnt his only check point video. Not by a long shot.

WHOA!! - you mean this guy does this thing on a regular basis? - holy smokes!

forget everything I said earlier, this guy is my new hero - he's a fantastic performance artist, no wonder he offers DVDs of his street actions

God Bless America

BEST - Ron

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yamato

That was about the officers that were beating him up. I am talking you dizzy.

You are right, he did not say that. Only I am a citizen of Israel, which is a lie, nonetheless

It's late, mate. I'm off. My points stay, yours crumble away. Point out how his rights are infringed in this very video, and I continue this conversation tomorrow. If you can't, I am done.

I thought you were already out, mate? No, that's not a lie either. He explains the rationale in the Bible. My "points" do not crumble away. He's exercising his First, Fourth, and Fifth Amendment rights in these videos. Nobody is saying that the agents can't stop him and question him. They stopped him. They questioned him. Nothing illegal happened and his rights weren't infringed upon in the OP video BECAUSE HE EXERCISED HIS RIGHTS. If you need my help explaining to you how his rights were infringed upon in the 2nd video, I can help you with that, but I don't think you need my help because you've already admitted they were infringed. Now what are you going to return and complain about?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sir Wearer of Hats

He's exercising his rights, whatever else you think he's doing. We can find an agenda in every single discussion on this forum bar none. What agenda is better than exercising your rights?

My argument is that expressing his rights is secondary to his other agenda. He is pushing his own agenda via the exression of his rights.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yamato

My argument is that expressing his rights is secondary to his other agenda. He is pushing his own agenda via the exression of his rights.

Whatever news story that's presented for discussion on this forum is merely secondary to the agenda the news outlet has that covered it. Usually this is profit. Even if you're right, there's no inherent difference with this. Except it's an individual and not a corporation.

And there's nothing better than pushing your own agenda in life. That's called being free. First you have to have one though. Successfully running checkpoints is worth getting views, whatever you think isn't secondary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yamato

Years before the OP video, he was beaten and tazed by police and his rights were infringed. (Anyone needing help figuring out what rights those are, please ask! :))

This is a hell of a way to promote "his other agenda".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
some new guy

Whatever news story that's presented for discussion on this forum is merely secondary to the agenda the news outlet has that covered it. Usually this is profit. Even if you're right, there's no inherent difference with this. Except it's an individual and not a corporation.

And there's nothing better than pushing your own agenda in life. That's called being free. First you have to have one though. Successfully running checkpoints is worth getting views, whatever you think isn't secondary.

you see, that actually makes sense - you should have said that earlier instead of all that Constitutional and Nazi stuff - and its great he's able to make a profit from his DVDs (well, at least I hope he makes a profit, he does seem to have a loyal following)

I have my own agenda and I follow it, it is total freedom when you do things your way

God Bless America

BEST - Ron

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Likely Guy

Came to read about, "Citizen of Israel vs Nazi Checkpoint".

Read a libertarian diatribe, leaving disappointed.

Yeah, I know... don't let the door hit me on my way out.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Paranoid Android

Ok, I just read up on the Fourth Amendment and whether Interior Immigration Checkpoints violate the Constitution. That link had this to say:

"Border Patrol agents at checkpoints have legal authority that agents do not have when patrolling areas away from the border. The United States Supreme Court ruled that Border Patrol agents may stop a vehicle at fixed checkpoints for brief questioning of its occupants even if there is no reason to believe that the particular vehicle contains illegal aliens.[4] The Court further held that Border Patrol agents "have wide discretion" to refer motorists selectively to a secondary inspection area for additional brief questioning.[5] In contrast, the Supreme Court held that Border Patrol agents on roving patrol may stop a vehicle only if they have reasonable suspicion that the vehicle contains aliens who may be illegally in the United States—a higher threshold for stopping and questioning motorists than at checkpoints.[6] The constitutional threshold for searching a vehicle is the same, however, and must be supported by either consent or probable cause, whether in the context of a roving patrol or a checkpoint search.[7]"
So with that said:

Text in Bold - The Supreme Court agrees that brief stoppages at Fixed Checkpoints (ie, stationary) are not a violation of Rights. Therefore the border agents were not acting unconstitutional when they stopped this pastor.

Text in Blue - in order to facilitate smooth traffic flow, if a suspicion is raised, they have "wide discretion" to ask further questions at a secondary location. So far, this is exactly what is shown in the video. When asked if he was a United States citizen, the pastor replied that he was actually an Israeli citizen. That is enough to warrant secondary discussion.

Text in Red - However, if this was a roving patrol rather than a stationary stop, then they would have to have strong suspicion of illegal activity in order to stop the pastor. However, since this was a stationary checkpoint this matters not.

Text in Green - in either case, further searches and demands for documentation cannot be asked for unless there is evidence of suspicious activity. Now this pastor refuses to give out his personal details. He refuses to say whether he has a Right to live in the United States, and he refuses to even acknowledge that the car belongs to him and he is legally allowed to drive it. I don't care where in the world you live, that is the definition of "suspicious activity" and the officers are well within their Right to detain him until he answers the questions.

People can call these "Nazi Checkpoints" all they like, the truth is they're just using rhetoric to support their theories. No one's Rights are being violated, unless you don't understand the ruling of the Supreme Court as outlined above in the quote.

Best wishes,

~ Regards, PA

Edited by Paranoid Android
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Clarakore

They also offer comedic value as entertainer after entertainer on bus tours get caught for minor drug violations out at the Sierra Blanca highway checkpoint near El Paso.

Edited by The world needs you

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yamato

Ok, I just read up on the Fourth Amendment and whether Interior Immigration Checkpoints violate the Constitution. That link had this to say:

So with that said:

Text in Bold - The Supreme Court agrees that brief stoppages at Fixed Checkpoints (ie, stationary) are not a violation of Rights. Therefore the border agents were not acting unconstitutional when they stopped this pastor.

Text in Blue - in order to facilitate smooth traffic flow, if a suspicion is raised, they have "wide discretion" to ask further questions at a secondary location. So far, this is exactly what is shown in the video. When asked if he was a United States citizen, the pastor replied that he was actually an Israeli citizen. That is enough to warrant secondary discussion.

Text in Red - However, if this was a roving patrol rather than a stationary stop, then they would have to have strong suspicion of illegal activity in order to stop the pastor. However, since this was a stationary checkpoint this matters not.

Text in Green - in either case, further searches and demands for documentation cannot be asked for unless there is evidence of suspicious activity. Now this pastor refuses to give out his personal details. He refuses to say whether he has a Right to live in the United States, and he refuses to even acknowledge that the car belongs to him and he is legally allowed to drive it. I don't care where in the world you live, that is the definition of "suspicious activity" and the officers are well within their Right to detain him until he answers the questions.

People can call these "Nazi Checkpoints" all they like, the truth is they're just using rhetoric to support their theories. No one's Rights are being violated, unless you don't understand the ruling of the Supreme Court as outlined above in the quote.

Best wishes,

~ Regards, PA

How many of your 22,599 posts were you just using rhetoric to support your theories? 8,000? 10,000? 14,000? Does it matter?

I understand that the Supreme Court doesn't always get it right, it's often a matter of 5 to 4 on whether something is Constitutional or not. When practices violate the clearest laws of the land like the Fourth Amendment then there are legal exceptions to the Constitution in the way lesser laws are adjudicated or administered, yet I understand and have already read what you've posted above.

Text in bold, I already said they didn't infringe on his rights (in the OP video only) because he exercised his rights effectively.

This was a stationary stop. Text in blue and text in red, yes the agents can stop you. The agents can question you. I'm repeating those points again for your behalf. Those aren't being contested.

The Fourth Amendment says that a search can occur on probable cause after an appropriate warrant is issued. That's presenting a law in writing that's explicitly clear and impossible to misunderstand. If the flow of traffic is enough reason to violate it, what isn't?

Text in green, that's the definition, in your opinion which is dressed up in flowers of "I don't care where in the world you live". You need to present a law in writing where I live. Show me the law that says you have to answer their questions.

Thanks!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yamato

you see, that actually makes sense - you should have said that earlier instead of all that Constitutional and Nazi stuff - and its great he's able to make a profit from his DVDs (well, at least I hope he makes a profit, he does seem to have a loyal following)

I have my own agenda and I follow it, it is total freedom when you do things your way

God Bless America

BEST - Ron

Sometimes an agenda is as simple as traveling freely within the United States unmolested by federal goons in costumes doing California's job for it up to 100 miles within the border.

Californians should be able to possess and ingest medicine legally prescribed to them by doctors without federal goons in costumes overrunning California law and hauling sick people off to cages.

It's just another example of federal overreach, to put it mildly. And "Show me your papers" is Nazi as hell.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dumbledore the Awesome

Nonsense. There are videos galore of him asserting his rights at checkpoints and this one was the only one I found where he's mentioned his DVD. Notice how long it takes for him to reach for it after the Nazi checkpoint began. How about assisting me in finding one of those many other examples and posting them here? No, you're not interested in all that. You're in Berlin, so what do you care about the Bill of Rights? Promote "showing your papers" on the Europe board.

Why do you, and presumably he, keep using the word Nazi? really, using it as shorthand for "perhaps slightly ponderous Police/Law Enforcement officers behaving in that slightly ponderous way they always do towards members of the Publick" really does rather insult those who did know what Nazi really meant.

Edited by Colonel Rhuairidh
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Paranoid Android

The Fourth Amendment says that a search can occur on probable cause after an appropriate warrant is issued. That's presenting a law in writing that's explicitly clear and impossible to misunderstand. If the flow of traffic is enough reason to violate it, what isn't?

Umm, it isn't. They aren't searching him. When he said he was an Israeli citizen, he was asked to go to a secondary location, where he was questioned further. This was so that the traffic could still flow while he was questioned in greater detail. When he was questioned again in the secondary location, he chose not to answer and he was therefore rightly flagged for suspicious activity, and worst case scenario they could have issued a warrant to search him and the car.

Show me the law that says you have to answer their questions.

Thanks!

There isn't. But if he chooses not to answer then it's suspicious behaviour and they can then detain him until a warrant is issued to search him and the car. After all, if he wasn't hiding anything then why is he refusing to answer the question? The obvious answer here is that he's trolling them in real life. But in another case where someone is refusing to hand over identification, is there a more stringent reason? What if he's on the terror watch list? You get the idea. Edited by Paranoid Android
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dumbledore the Awesome

I'm curious, where was the checkpoint and why was it there? - were they looking for an escaped convict or drunk drivers? - what make this illegal? - I've been stopped at checkpoints, I say yes sir or no sir and then I'm on my way - a couple of honest answers and he would have been on his way - nothing says honesty like telling a policeman you are a citizen of a different country and not answering a simple question like "Is this your car?"

BEST - Ron

yes, he didn't allow any kind of context to slip in, like where he was and where he was going, he just made it seem as if he just happened to be driving along, with a camera running on his dash poitning at him, (with a copy of his DVD to hand, which he just happened to keep waving in front of the camera), when suddenly he came upon a Nazi Checkpoint right in the middle of nowhere, and he just decided to be a jerk and keep blethering about being a "Citizen of Israel".

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dumbledore the Awesome

I've seen enough of his refusals to answer your question. It's usually about 50 miles north of the Mexico border. The agents said why it was there, to check citizenship papers. On one hand they're pulling everyone over, on the other hand, they justified pulling Anderson over on "suspicion". And then they couldn't answer the question why they were suspicious. Because he was driving down the road? It's total nonsense.

because he kept talking about being a "Citizen of Israel" and saying in response to "Is this your vehicle, sir?" "I'd rather not answer that, i'll wave my DVD at you instead"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yamato

Umm, it isn't. They aren't searching him. When he said he was an Israeli citizen, he was asked to go to a secondary location, where he was questioned further. This was so that the traffic could still flow while he was questioned in greater detail. When he was questioned again in the secondary location, he chose not to answer and he was therefore rightly flagged for suspicious activity, and worst case scenario they could have issued a warrant to search him and the car.

There isn't. But if he chooses not to answer then it's suspicious behaviour and they can then detain him until a warrant is issued to search him and the car. After all, if he wasn't hiding anything then why is he refusing to answer the question? The obvious answer here is that he's trolling them in real life. But in another case where someone is refusing to hand over identification, is there a more stringent reason? What if he's on the terror watch list? You get the idea.

Trolls are under bridges, and as it turns out, also in checkpoints. What law says he has to go to a secondary location? "Go ahead and pull into secondary." "No thanks" was a better flex of muscle than what he did in the OP.

If the OP is suspicious behavior because you say so then they can name whatever behavior they want as suspicious because they say so. Someone's voice is shaky. Maybe their hand is shaking. They must have something to hide! They're awful quiet! Something doesn't seem right! They're not obeying everything I tell them to do? I'm suspicious now! Whatever, brother. That's a standard of whatever the agents think or say goes, and it pees our rights straight out the window at their pleasure.

*snip*

The fastest way to get through a checkpoint? LOL this is just hilarious. :clap:

[media=]

[/media] Edited by Paranoid Android
Removed previously deleted content

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yamato

482 views in...*checks watch*...23 hours! ;)

Americans exercising their rights is so universally revolting to foreigners but arrrrrghhgh! They can't keep away from it! Must touch Yamato's thread. Must touch Yamato's....

*slap*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dumbledore the Awesome

482 views in...*checks watch*...23 hours! ;)

Americans exercising their rights is so universally revolting to foreigners but arrrrrghhgh! They can't keep away from it! Must touch Yamato's thread. Must touch Yamato's....

*slap*

So you've run out of ways to respond to people's responses, then? Do you have any views regarding his prattling about "a citizen of israel" and his deliberately going out of his way to be as provocative as possible? You do not consider that this was clearly set up with the deliberate intention of making, if you like, a martyr of himself, or does he really drive around everywhere with a dashboard cam pointed at himself and a copy of his DVD to hand?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yamato

So you've run out of ways to respond to people's responses, then? Do you have any views regarding his prattling about "a citizen of israel" and his deliberately going out of his way to be as provocative as possible? You do not consider that this was clearly set up with the deliberate intention of making, if you like, a martyr of himself, or does he really drive around everywhere with a dashboard cam pointed at himself and a copy of his DVD to hand?

Running out of exercising our rights? What other way is there to respond? You've got to confront the legal establishment if you want change in society. All the great changes throughout history have come about from civil disobedience and people brave enough to be willing to provoke the establishment.

Here's a very literal exercise of the right to remain silent. Maybe you prefer this way of exercising our rights better? That's okay too.

[media=]

[/media]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yamato

yes, he didn't allow any kind of context to slip in, like where he was and where he was going, he just made it seem as if he just happened to be driving along, with a camera running on his dash poitning at him, (with a copy of his DVD to hand, which he just happened to keep waving in front of the camera), when suddenly he came upon a Nazi Checkpoint right in the middle of nowhere, and he just decided to be a jerk and keep blethering about being a "Citizen of Israel".

So blathering about being a Citizen of Israel is the only problem you've got? Well that's not very much of a problem. You see, there's theoretically an infinite number of ways that one can refuse to answer a federal agent's questions. Maybe that's not obvious yet? Maybe you have some better ideas than the one presented in the OP? Share them with the community today. Make sure they don't include any blather though. You just hate that!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yamato

So you've run out of ways to respond to people's responses, then? Do you have any views regarding his prattling about "a citizen of israel" and his deliberately going out of his way to be as provocative as possible? You do not consider that this was clearly set up with the deliberate intention of making, if you like, a martyr of himself, or does he really drive around everywhere with a dashboard cam pointed at himself and a copy of his DVD to hand?

And by the way, the rest of what you're describing here is just nonsense... provably false if you're even honest enough to watch the video and comment on what you're seeing accurately. He didn't have a DVD in hand until 9:48 of a 12:32 video. And he was just driving along, into the checkpoint. Is it the camera on his dash that's got you flustered? Well that's just too bad then isn't it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dumbledore the Awesome

So blathering about being a Citizen of Israel is the only problem you've got? Well that's not very much of a problem. You see, there's theoretically an infinite number of ways that one can refuse to answer a federal agent's questions. Maybe that's not obvious yet? Maybe you have some better ideas than the one presented in the OP? Share them with the community today. Make sure they don't include any blather though. You just hate that!

Oh of course he has right not to have to answer, but a law enforcement officer would probably be unlikely to recognise "Citizen of Israel" as being some kind of religious reference, which was presumably what he was talking about, so saying that would be bound to mark you out in the small minds of the average Guardian of one's Borders as being worthy of special attention, wouldn't it. So really he was looking for trouble, wasn't he.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.