Friday, June 24, 2011

Dearborn Police Bar Christian Group from Public Street Near Mosque

A few hours before Dearborn's Arab Festival began last week, Pastor Terry Jones was preparing to give a speech at City Hall. Police were there in full force to protect Pastor Jones. The police presence might easily give the impression that Dearborn respects the U.S. Constitution. But alas, appearances can be deceiving.

Dearborn Police were protecting Terry Jones for one simple reason: more than a dozen cameras, including many news cameras, were pointing at Terry Jones. Dearborn Police had no concern for protecting First Amendment rights. They were there to protect the reputation of Dearborn.

How do I know? Well, just as Pastor Jones was preparing for his speech, a few peaceful Christian evangelists were preparing to distribute DVDs, pamphlets, and copies of the Gospel to Muslims near the largest mosque in North America. Without a dozen cameras recording, Dearborn Police showed far less concern for the U.S. Constitution.

If you remember, this is the same police department that stopped Christians from peacefully distributing copies of the Gospel outside the Arab Festival last year. (The court later ruled that Dearborn Police had violated our Constitutional rights.)

It's also the same department that arrested four Christians for . . . um . . . er . . . attempting to cause a riot by answering questions.

For more on Dearborn, click here.


Foolster41 said...

I did some research, and it seems quite a few cities have laws that require permits to hand out anything on public property.

However, in Oklahoma (Greiner v Yale) this practice was deemed unconstitutional. What we need is a challenge in Michagan, and possibly the supreme court to challenge everywhere this practice as unconstitutional.

Nicky said...

who can we write to in Dearborn?

David Wood said...


The permit trick isn't supposed to be implemented on public streets, public sidewalks, or public parks, unless the speech activity is going to block the street, sidewalk, or park. These evangelists obviously weren't going to block anything, which means police weren't supposed to interfere with their activity.

I agree that Dearborn's activity needs to be challenged in court. Challenge coming in three . . . two . . .

simple_truth said...

Since I don't know that much about this issue, I will wait until I know more to say anything specific. It does appear that if what these people stated is exactly what happened, then there is definitely a problem with the conduct and directive of the police. Why would one need to have a permit to stand on public property leading into a mosque or any other building at a random time and day, even if it is private? Why couldn't one come unannounced to anywhere and proselytize? This is not like a protest, where I could see some kind of permit being possible, depending upon certain conditions. What would happen if the tracts being disseminated were non religious in nature. The key in my mind is the fact that the entrance, at least, is public. I hope to find out more about this as the story unfolds.

Letitia (The Damsel) said...

Look, if the ugly Westboro people can protest anywhere they want--even outside a church in Seattle without needing to buy a specific permit from the city they are in (and most of the time they do not--public property), then neither do Christians have to get a specific permit to stand in front of a mosque or across the street from a mosque.

They could always simply claim to be standing around and *happen to hold Gospel literature in their hands. If people in their cars or walking by *happen to want to talk to them and want what they are holding, then what permit do they need for that?

Besides, they already have a permit called The U.S. Constitution.

Joe Bradley said...


Since this is a continuation of Mayor John O'Reilly's demagoguery in pandering to his voting base, you could write an email to him at the following email address*. There is also a phone number at this web site that you can call.

Since the Police Chief is an appointed, not elected position, it will do no good to write to Police Chief Haddad because he must walk in lock step with O'Reilly if he wishes to keep his job.

Clearly, O'Reilly is calling the shots in Dearborn and his policies are political, not Constitutional.



Haecceitas said...

I find it interesting that they would prevent George Saieg in particular from doing something that he clearly has the lawful right to do, as he was already vindicated in court against the Dearborn Sharia Machine. It's my understanding that Saieg didn't seek any monetary compensation for the breach of his rights, so perhaps the police is assuming that he won't do that in the future either.

Joe Bradley said...

Perhaps Representative Peter King and his hearings on Islam could address the systemic Constitutional violations in Dearborn which seem to have an Islamic basis. The city needs to be placed under a Federal consent decree where individual agents of the city could be charged and jailed for Contempt of Court.

Try writing him, I do quite frequently.

Joe Bradley said...

I have just sent this message off to Representative Peter King who is the Chair of hearings which investigate radical Islam. I believe that it is the duty of each and every one of us to suggest that the City of Dearborn police department be placed under Federal leadership since it has demonstrated it's inability to follow Constitutional law. This is one of the prices we pay to live in a Constitutional Republic.


To: The Honorable Representative Peter King.

The continuing violations of the Constitutional rights of the Christian community has now become systemic within Dearborn, MI. If the Federal courts rule against the City of Dearborn and enforce the Constitution, the City of Dearborn merely ignores the court's ruling and continues the Constitutional violations. Such is Sharia Law.

The Federal government now needs to step in and take over the Dearborn Police Department as it has done in New Orleans, Detroit, Los Angeles and wherever corruption has become an issue, so large, that the police have become law breakers rather than law enforcers.

Go here* for video relevant to the most recent Constitutional violation within Dearborn.

Go here** for the historic Constitutional problems within Dearborn.




GreekAsianPanda said...

I'm glad you and your team didn't have any problems this year. If the Christian group is indeed in the right (which I'm fairly certain they are), then hopefully things will be sorted out. I can hardly believe Terry Jones got to give a speech and a peaceful group was stopped, but at least they had a chance to hand out some Gospel material.

1MoreMuslim said...

Oh , Dearborn has become like Israel.

Joe Bradley said...

No 1MoreMuslim, Dearborn has become like Iran.

Joe Bradley said...

GAP - Mayor O'Reilly's police force is giving the noisy and disruptive Christian factions an open reign and there are lots of cameras rolling when they act up. However, the Dearborn PD continues the City censorship of Christians when their speech is reasonable and they have NO CAMERAS.

Clearly Mayor O'Reilly is making this a Public Relations war against Christians.

The lesson to be learned is, if you are a Christian preaching in Dearborn and you plan to be reasonable and peaceful, bring LOTS of cameras and witnesses.

Foolster41 said...

David: In the articles, it appeared to me they do indeed specifically say "public property", and don't mention anything about blocking, so a permit is required in any case in these cities.

Of course this is unconstitutional, but only stand because they are unchallenged. I'm looking foreword to that challenge.

1moremuslim: Thank you for further showing your dishonesty. Israel follows the sharia law practice of censoring non-Muslims? Don't make me laugh! I think you're thinking

1MoreMuslim said...

Well , if in Iran Christiasns can't preach without a permit , then Iran is like Israel. Israel forbids Christians from preaching because of deception. But I think Iran is worst.

noazrky said...

You should sue! it is the only way that cops will understand our constitutional rights.

Foolster41 said...

Again, thank you for showing your dishonesty and why people should be weary of trusting even "moderate" seeming muslims.

The Israel constitution grants rights for people of ALL religions in Israel. Why defame Israel?

Joe Bradley said...

Well 1MM, you got caught in a lie, or should I say practicing Taqiyya?

Not to worry however, I'm sure your credibility in the Mosque won't suffer. In fact, this will probably give it a boost.

Anonymous said...

Just some food for thought...I recently read a book called The blood of lambs by Kamal Saleem. He said in Lebenon they had a sayin "first saturday then sunday" he said the meaning behind this is that first islam will defeat the jews (whos sabbath is saturday) then the christians (whos sabbath is sunday). I just wonder if Nabeels new lebenese friend Hakeem a.k.a Jason III was refering to this when he said upon leaving "I hope to see you sunday". Good job at defusing the situation Nabeel and showing that the love of Christ can calm even the most condesending and hostile of people. Il pray for you all including Hakeem. Godbless.

Unknown said...

If the camera man had not been there, no doubt the preacher would have been beaten to death by young punks. Islam attracts domestic violence abusers, and power-hungry, inadequate men, and lazy, ignorant women who do not want to have to be mature adults. They are attracted by the Sharia (legal) sanctioning of sexual dominance, plunder of non-Muslims, and impunity for criminal behavior against non-Muslims and women. It is much like what attracts people to blatant satan-worship.

Under U.S. law, there are two legal arenas which deal with damaging behavior, criminal and civil. Criminal prosecution for crimes is the government's responsibility and being a witness at trial is the citizen's responsibility. Civil ("civilized") prosecution for money reparation or equity is the responsibility of the injured party. U.S. citizens are going to have to come out of the cocoon excuse of ignorance and "I don't want to get involved" and to be willing to file lawsuits and be witnesses against jihad crimes. U.S. citizens are going to have to be smart and put their technology to good use as evidence against jihad crimes (e.g., using a cell phone camera to take pictures of a jihad crime). It is also not a crime to defend oneself or another against immediate physical threat, so U.S. citizens need to be prepared to act against the jihad crimes they come across. U.S. citizens also need to write their representatives and vote responsibly, making sure our laws are not changed to accommodate Sharia law. The time to be passive and lazy has passed. Rights and freedoms are for the vigilant.