Translate

Saturday, July 11, 2015

GOVERNMENT SECRET POLICE PROGRAM EXPOSED~INTERVIEW WITH LAW FIRM THAT MADE DISCOVERY

GOVERNMENT SECRET POLICE PROGRAM EXPOSED
INTERVIEW WITH THE BERNHOFT LAW FIRM
REVEALS FALSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE, PLANNED PERJURY, 
BY GOVERNMENT AGENCIES
Published on Jul 11, 2015
Federal agencies are circumventing constitutional obligations by utilizing a secret fusion center where illegally obtained information is passed on to be used against American citizens. All federal law enforcement agencies are teaching their agents how to fabricate evidence and commit perjury under oath if necessary in order to protect and conceal the illegal sources of their investigations.
Attorney Robert Bernhoft and Former IRS Special Agent Joe Banister tell you how this unprecedented case will affect you.

http://www.bernhoftlaw.com/
"PARALLEL CONSTRUCTION" CREATES A SET UP 
USING FALSE ACCUSATIONS BACKED UP BY LIES

CHRISTIAN BACKLASH: OKLAHOMA GOVERNOR REFUSES TO REMOVE TEN COMMANDMENTS MONUMENT FOLLOWING RULING BY STATE SUPREME COURT

OKLAHOMA GOVERNOR REFUSES TO REMOVE TEN COMMANDMENTS MONUMENT 
FOLLOWING RULING
BY HEATHER CLARK
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

OKLAHOMA CITY — The governor of Oklahoma is standing her ground and refusing to remove a Ten Commandments monument following a ruling by the state Supreme Court declaring that the display must go because it infringed the state Constitution.
Gov. Mary Fallin announced on Tuesday that the monument will stay in place while the state files an appeal in the matter, asserting that “the court God it wrong.”
“The Ten Commandments monument was built to recognize and honor the historical significance of the Commandments in our state’s and nation’s systems of laws,” she wrote in a statement.
“The monument was built and maintained with private dollars. It is virtually identical to a monument on the grounds of the Texas State Capitol which the United States Supreme Court ruled to be permissible,” Fallin continued. “It is a privately funded tribute to historical events, not a taxpayer funded endorsement of any religion, as some have alleged.”
As previously reported, the display had been proposed by Rep. Mike Ritze in 2009, and was soon after approved by the largely Republican-run state legislature. Ritze paid over $1000 for the display, and no taxpayer funds were utilized in its creation.
“[T]he Ten Commandments are an important component of the foundation of the laws and legal system of the United States of America and of the State of Oklahoma,” the 2009 bill authorizing the monument acknowledged. “[T]he courts of the United States of America and of various states frequently cite the Ten Commandments in published decisions, and acknowledgements of the role played by the Ten Commandments in our nation’s heritage are common throughout America.”
In August 2013, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Oklahoma filed suit against the display, asserting that its erection on the grounds of the state capitol building was unconstitutional.
The lead plaintiff was liberal minister Bruce Prescott, the director of Mainstream Oklahoma Baptists. Prescott said that mixing the sacred with the secular in such a manner cheapens the display, and asserted that it violated the Constitution’s Establishment Clause, which says that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion…”
In the meantime, a New York-based Satanist group sought to erect an “homage to Satan” near the monument, and other groups chimed in to seek permission to place statues at the location as well.
But last September, Seventh District Court Judge Thomas Prince concluded that the monument served a historical purpose and not solely the presentment of a religious message as it sits on a plot of land that contains 51 other expressive monuments.
The case was then refiled with the Oklahoma Supreme Court, which ruled 7-2 last week that the monument must be removed because it violates Article 2, Section 5, of the Oklahoma Constitution, which states that property cannot be used to promote a “church denomination or system of religion.”
“No public money or property shall ever be appropriated, applied, donated, or used, directly or indirectly, for the use, benefit, or support of any sect, church, denomination, or system of religion, or for the use, benefit, or support of any priest, preacher, minister, or other religious teacher or dignitary, or sectarian institution as such,” the section reads.
Concurring justices were Chief Justice John F. Reif; Justice Yvonne Kauger; Justice Joseph M. Watt; Justice James R. Winchester; Justice James E. Edmondson; Justice Steve W. Taylor; and Justice Noma D. Gurich. Vice Chief Justice Douglas L. Combs and Justice Tom Colbert dissented.
But Gov. Fallin says that the court got it wrong and is refusing to remove the monument while the state appeals the decision.
“Oklahoma is a state where we respect the rule of law, and we will not ignore the state courts or their decisions,” she wrote in her statement this week. “However, we are also a state with three co-equal branches of government.”
“At this time, Attorney General Scott Pruitt, with my support, has filed a petition requesting a rehearing of the Ten Commandments case. Additionally, our legislature has signaled its support for pursuing changes to our state Constitution that will make it clear the Ten Commandments monument is legally permissible,” Fallin added. “If legislative efforts are successful, the people of Oklahoma will get to vote on the issue.”
The ACLU is now claiming that Fallin could be in contempt of court.
“The Supreme Court did not give any leeway in their opinion. The bipartisan, seven-member majority did not say remove the monument except if you look into your crystal ball and think the law might allow it at some point in the future and go ahead and keep it,” Executive Director Ryan Kiesel told Tulsa World. “The court said remove the monument.”
“Frankly, I would be astonished if we get to a point where the governor outright defies an order of our state’s highest court,” he said. “That said, if she does, there is a word for it. It is called contempt.”
_____________________________________________________
BRUCE PRESCOTT OF MAINSTREAM OKLAHOMA BAPTISTS:

HOMOSEXUAL ADVOCATES CALL FOR CHURCHES TO LOSE TAX EXEMPT STATUS FOLLOWING "GAY MARRIAGE" RULING

HOMOSEXUAL ADVOCATES CALL FOR CHURCHES TO LOSE TAX EXEMPT STATUS FOLLOWING "GAY MARRIAGE" RULING
BY HEATHER CLARK
SEE: http://christiannews.net/2015/07/06/homosexual-advocates-call-for-churches-to-lose-tax-exempt-status-following-gay-marriage-ruling/republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

At least two outspoken homosexual advocates are calling for churches nationwide to lose their tax-exempt status following last month’s U.S. Supreme Court ruling declaring that all 50 states must legalize same-sex “marriage.”
“[N]ow that the U.S. government formally recognizes marriage equality as a fundamental right, it really shouldn’t skew the tax code so as to give millions of dollars in tax breaks to groups which remain steadfastly bigoted on the subject,” wrote Felix Salmon, senior editor for Fusion, in an article entitled “Does Your Church Ban Gay Marriage? Then It Should Start Paying Taxes” last Monday.
He pointed to the Supreme Court ruling that resulted in the revocation of Bob Jones University’s tax exemption because of its stance surrounding interracial couples.
“The same argument can and should be applied to gay marriage,” Salmon stated. “If your organization does not support the right of gay men and women to marry, then the government should be very clear that you’re in the wrong. And it should certainly not bend over backwards to give you the privilege of tax exemption.”
He said that while he understands the concept of religious freedom, he doesn’t believe churches should be “rewarded” with tax exemption if their beliefs are contrary to Supreme Court rulings.
“[W]hen those views are fanatical and hurtful, they come into conflict with the views of any honorable legislator who believes in freedom and equality. And at that point, it makes perfect sense for our elected representatives to register their disapproval by abolishing the tax exemption for organizations who cling to narrow-minded and anachronistic views,” Salmon wrote.
TIME columnist Mark Oppenheimer made similar statements the day before in an article entitled “Now’s the Time to End Tax Exemptions for Religious Institutions”, commenting on a bill introduced by Utah Sen. Mark Lee, which seeks to protect the tax-exempt status of churches in light of the Supreme Court ruling.
“Rather than try to rescue tax-exempt status for organizations that dissent from settled public policy on matters of race or sexuality, we need to take a more radical step. It’s time to abolish, or greatly diminish, their tax-exempt statuses,” he wrote.
Oppenheimer then sought to dispute reasons for allowing the exemption to remain in place.
“Defenders of tax exemptions and deductions argue that if we got rid of them charitable giving would drop. It surely would, although how much, we can’t say,” he said. “Of course government revenue would go up, and that money could be used to, say, house the homeless and feed the hungry. We’d have fewer church soup kitchens—but countries that truly care about poverty don’t rely on churches to run soup kitchens.”
“[T]he logic of gay-marriage rights could lead to a reexamination of conservative churches’ tax exemptions,” Oppenheimer repeated. “But when that day comes, it will be long overdue.”
Aaron Goldstein, a writer for the American Spectator, disagreed. While he divulged that he personally supports same-sex “marriage,” he doesn’t believe the government has a right to meddle in the beliefs of the Church and noted that the Bob Jones ruling only applied to schools.
“Contrary to Salmon’s claims that the government should be very clear in telling churches they are in the wrong for not supporting same-sex marriage, there is absolutely no governmental interest where it concerns the affairs of churches or purely religious institutions,” he wrote. “Simply put, the government has no business telling churches and purely religious institutions that they are wrong about opposition to gay marriage or any other matter.”
“The federal government must leave churches, synagogues, mosques and other religious assemblies alone in this matter,” Goldstein said. “If they do not see fit to leave them alone, then the very concept of separation of church and state will have lost all meaning. It would end the separation of church and state as we know it.”
As previously reported, prior to the U.S. Supreme Court decision, Patrick Henry College Chancellor and Chairman of the Home School Legal Defense Association (HSLDA) Michael Farris warned that if the court ruled in favor of homosexual nuptials, the decision could result in tax exemption revocation for Christian schools. However, he also opined that the threat will not likely end there.
“No one should think that IRS implications will stop with colleges. Religious high schools, grade schools and any other religious institution will face the same outcome. And this includes churches,” Farris said. “Even if it takes the IRS years to begin the enforcement proceedings against such institutions, we can expect other fallout from this decision to begin shortly after the release of the Supreme Court’s opinion.”
According to the documentary “A Defense of God’s Law,” the nation’s decision to allow tax exemption for churches was grounded in Scripture. It cites Ezra 7:24, which outlines, “Also we certify you, that touching any of the priests and Levites, singers, porters, Nethinims, or ministers of this house of God, it shall not be lawful to impose toll, tribute, or custom, upon them.”
_______________________________________________________
FELIX SALMON OF FUSION ABOVE
MARK OPPENHEIMER OF TIME


CHRISTIAN BACKLASH: ENTIRE STAFF OF TENNESSEE COUNTY CLERK'S OFFICE RESIGNS OVER SUPREME COURT "GAY MARRIAGE" RULING

ENTIRE STAFF OF TENNESSEE COUNTY CLERK'S OFFICE RESIGNS OVER SUPREME COURT 
"GAY MARRIAGE" RULING
BY HEATHER CLARK
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

DECATUR COUNTY, Tenn. — The entire staff of a county clerk’s office in Tennessee has resigned following the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent ruling declaring that all 50 states must legalize same-sex “marriage.”
Three women who work at the Decatur County office announced their resignations this past week, which will be effective July 14. Clerk Gwen Pope, and employees Sharon Bell and Mickey Butler all have decided to leave their jobs because of their Christian convictions.
“It’s kind of sort of like you don’t want to draw attention to yourself for any reason,” Pope told local television station WBIR, stating that she never sought press over the matter. “That’s not why we’re doing this. Not doing it in any way to draw attention to us. It’s for the glory of God. He’s going to get all the glory.”
The outlet states that a number of area residents called or visited the office on Thursday to express their support of the women.
“These three ladies stood upon their beliefs and they stood upon their morals and no one can fault them,” resident Scott King said. “Too often we as Christians don’t do that. It’s time we followed the lead of what they showed us.”
Commissioner David Boroughs also backed the decision.
“That’s a personal individual decision, but I strongly support them if their faith is that strong,” he said. “I’m proud of them that their faith is so strong and well-rounded that they feel they can do that.”
According to the Associated Press, all Tennessee counties except Decatur County are issuing licenses to same-sex twosomes.
While some believe that stepping down is the right move in such cases, as previously reported, an attorney who works with Alabama Supreme Court Justice Roy Moore urged Christian clerks within his state to stay and fight.
“[W]ill your conscience cause you to resign?” Win Johnson wrote in a letter issued to public officials throughout Alabama. “Why would you leave the people of this state, their children, your children and grandchildren to the wolves, those who would rend the society apart with their denial of what’s good and evil?”
“Your duty is to stand against the ravages of a superior authority that would go beyond its rightful power and force upon the people something evil,” he continued. “That’s what the founders of our country did when Parliament exceeded its powers. That’s what the Puritans in civil government in the 1600’s did when the King exceeded his powers.”
Johnson said that the proper response would be to just say no.
“You have authority as an elected official. You also are sworn to uphold the U.S. Constitution and Alabama Constitution,” he wrote. “Don’t acquiesce to the takeover (actually the takedown)! Use your authority and every legal angle to oppose the tyrants! If necessary, just say ‘No.’ It is not rebellion for you to say, ‘Your interpretation of the Constitution is wrong, beyond your authority, and detrimental to this nation.’ In fact, it’s your duty. You’re not opposing the rule of law, you’re upholding it by saying that.”
______________________________________________________

Christian clerks, bakers take stand against Supreme Court ruling on same-sex union

BY JONAH HICAP
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

Christians are invoking religious freedom as a response to the US Supreme Court ruling that legalised same-sex marriage in the US.
In Decatur, Tennessee, employees of the country clerk's office all resigned in order for them not to issue same-sex marriage license.
In Oregon, the owner of Sweetcakes by Melissa bakery is fighting back and urged Christians to take a stand after the couple who owns the bakery was found liable for refusing to make a wedding cake for a lesbian couple.
In Rowan, Kentucky, a county clerk has been sued for refusing to issue marriage license to gay and straight couples, citing "religious concerns."
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Kentucky filed the lawsuit on Thursday on behalf of two gay couples and two straight couples against County Clerk Kim Davis.
The plaintiffs in the Kentucky case are same-sex couples April Miller and Karen Ann Roberts, and Aaron Skaggs and Barry Spartman, and straight couples Shantel Burke and Stephen Napier, and Jody Fernandez and Kevin Holloway.
Davis has refused to issue marriage license to any couple.
In Tennessee, clerk Gwen Pope and employees Sharon Bell and Mickey Butler have resigned from their jobs because of the Supreme Court decision and their last day will be on July 14, according to a report by WBIR.
"It's for the glory of God. He's going to get all the glory," Pope said of her decision to resign.
Decatur resident Scott King praised the three women for fighting for their religious beliefs.
"These three ladies stood upon their beliefs and they stood upon their morals and no one can fault them. Too often we as Christians don't do that. It's time we followed the lead of what they showed us," he said.
In Oregon, Aaron and Melissa Klein, owners of Sweetcakes by Melissa, were ordered by the state's Bureau of Labor and Industries (BOLI) to pay $135,000 for discrimination after they refused to make a wedding cake for lesbian couple Rachel Cryer-Bowman and Laurel Bowman-Cryer in 2013.
Aaron denounced the ruling and said he's not backing down.
"For years, we've heard same-sex marriage will not affect anybody. I'm here firsthand to tell everyone in America that it has already impacted people. Christians, get ready to take a stand. Get ready for civil disobedience," he told The Blaze.
He said they will request a stay in the order and will likely appeal the ruling.

SOUTH CAROLINA SENATOR PREACHES AGAINST HOMOSEXUAL ABOMINATION ON SENATE FLOOR

Bright

‘Time for the Church to Rise Up': 

Senator Preaches Against Homosexual ‘Abomination’ on Senate Floor

BY HEATHER CLARK
SEE: http://christiannews.net/2015/07/06/time-for-the-church-to-rise-up-senator-denounces-lighting-white-house-in-abomination-colors/republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

COLUMBIA, South Carolina — A South Carolina state senator denounced the celebration of homosexuality in the White House and across the country during an impassioned speech today on the Senate floor.
“I heard our president sing a religious hymn [at the Charleston church funeral], and then Friday night, I watched the White House [be] lit up in the abomination colors,” Sen. Lee Bright lamented. “It’s time for the church to rise up. It’s time for the state of South Carolina to rise up.”
The senator made his remarks during a debate about whether the Confederate flag should be removed from the state capitol building.
“Romans chapter one is clear; the Bible is clear,” Bright declared. “This nation was founded on Judeo-Christian principles and they are under assault by men in black robes who are not elected by you. We’ve got to make a stand. … Let’s deal with the national sins that we face today.”
He asked that county clerks not have to choose between their jobs and their faith.
“We talk about abortion, but this gay marriage thing I believe will [turn us into] one nation gone under,” Bright stated. “Like President Reagan said, ‘If we’re not one nation under God, we’ll be one nation gone under.'”
“And for us to sanctify deviate behavior from five judges—It’s time for us to make our stand, Church,” he continued. “It’s time for us to make our stand and we’re not doing it.”
Bright suggested that there were bigger problems in our nation to discuss than whether or not the Confederate flag flies overhead.
“We can rally together and talk about a flag all we want, but the devil is taking control of this land and we’re not stopping him,” he declared. “If the state’s got to get out of the marriage business, then let’s out of the business of marriage because we cannot succumb to what’s been done to the future of this nation.”
Bright, a Southern Baptist, noted that Christ taught His followers that being loving does not mean to embrace sin.
“I believe that Christ teaches us to love the homosexual, but He also teaches us to stand in the gap against sin,” he said. “I know that we need to respect our brother and love our brother, but we cannot respect this sin in the state of South Carolina, so I’m asking you … to deal with marriage.”
The senator remarked that if the state was not willing to push back against the federal government to at least make a way to protect Christians from punishment.
Brights remarks have been characterized by some viewers as a “rant,” while others have applauded him for taking a firm stand for God in the midst of a society that has turned its back on their Creator.
_____________________________________________________