Tag Archives: police state
By: Joshua Krause | The Daily Sheeple –
The ISIS bogeyman strikes again. New York Police Chief Bill Bratton announced that he is seeking approval to hire an additional 450 police officers to counter the threat of ISIS. With the average annual salary of a new police officer at over $44,000, this would cost the city roughly $20,000,000 per year; and all for an organization that has never attacked the city. The officers would be working with the NYPD’s counter-terrorism unit, which is also responsible for monitoring protests throughout the city.
Despite his claims that “We are entering a new era where we cannot live in fear, but we have to live increasingly aware of our surroundings” his suggestion sounds an awful lot like it’s based on fear, rather than sound reasoning. The average American is much more likely to die from something mundane like food poisoning or slipping in the bathtub, than they are from terrorism. But Bill Bratton still thinks that we need to spend millions of dollars on armed bureaucrats.
Furthermore, I don’t think anybody really believes that more cops will actually prevent terrorism. In most cases, terrorist plots are either provocateured by intelligence and law enforcement agencies, or are foiled by ordinary citizens. New York’s City Hall is also unimpressed by the scaremongering, and previously snubbed the City Council’s request for an additional 1,000 police officers.
Article first published at The Daily Sheeple.
Joshua Krause is a reporter, writer and researcher at The Daily Sheeple. He was born and raised in the Bay Area and is a freelance writer and author. You can follow Joshua’s reports at Facebook or on his personal Twitter. Joshua’s website is Strange Danger.
Police Have Officially Killed 400 People In 2015, A New Grieving Family Every Seven And A Half Hours
By: Cassandra Fairbanks | The Free Thought Project –
As of May 5, 2015, the police in the United States of America have killed 401 people that we know of.
Deaths By Law Enforcement 2015:
- 91 in the 31 days of January
- 85 in the 28 days of February
- 115 in the 31 days of March
- 101 in the 30 days of April
- 8 people in the 5 days of May
Extrapolating those numbers out to an hourly figure and the police have killed someone, on average, every 7.48 hours. While there is no government-run database, Killed By Police has taken it upon themselves to keep track, and are doing a fantastic job thus far. It’s truly a Cop Crisis.
The three youngest are A’donte Washington, Jason C. Hendrix, and Kendre Omari Alston, who were all only 16-years-old. The oldest was 87-year-old Lewis Becker. At least four officers have also been shot and killed by other officers.
Meanwhile, the Officer Down Memorial Page is reporting gunfire related deaths of on-duty officers is down 43%.
Law Enforcement Deaths 2015:
- 9/11 related illness: 2
- Accidental: 1
- Assault: 1
- Automobile accident: 12
- Gunfire: 8
- Gunfire (Accidental): 2
- Heart attack: 10
- Motorcycle accident: 1
- Struck by vehicle: 2
- Vehicle pursuit: 2
The death by assault was Patrolman George Nissen, and they are referring to injuries sustained 10 years earlier when he was attempting to break up a large fight on February 13th, 2005.
A look at the two which were struck by vehicles, both were accidents, with one occurring while the officer was off duty and had stopped to help someone on an icy road. The other was an accident where a semi truck crashed into the officer’s vehicle.
That leaves the eight by gunfire as deaths due to suspects actively attempting to harm them this year.
Deaths of officers directly at hands of suspects this year:
- 0 in January
- 0 in February
- 6 in March
- 0 in April
- 2 in May
This means that in the 125 days of 2015, the police have been killed after being shot by a suspect, on average, every 375 hours.
According to an FBI report, Americans are less violent than ever, yet the police seem to be growing increasingly violent. These numbers seem to agree.
Being a police officer isn’t even close to being in the top 10 most dangerous jobs in this country. According to the 2013 report by the Federal Bureau of Labor Statistics on work-related fatal injuries, “Police and sheriff’s patrol deputies” ranked as the 41st most dangerous occupation.
Just some numbers for you to consider next time you or someone you know tries to claim that the “brave” men and women in blue are perpetually “fearing for their life” so that they “can get home to their families.”
Every seven and a half hours our police leave another family planning a funeral. Enough is enough; visit our #solutions section if you’d like to find out some of the many ways we can change this paradigm.
Contributed by Cassandra Fairbanks of The Free Thought Project.
“The State has but one face for me: that of the police. To my eyes, all of the State’s ministries have this single face, and I cannot imagine the ministry of culture other than as the police of culture, with its prefect and commissioners.” – Jean Dubuffet
The New World Order, designed around a functional police state that is encouraged by continuous popular cultural messages, is apparent to even the most avid establishment apologist. Liberty and freedom, hardly ever mentioned in a positive light by the mass media, is a direct threat to the ruling class. The proliferation of degenerate behavior is lauded so that those who object to such conduct will be demeaned as outcasts of the decadent society. The imposition of a police state is necessary to coerce decent people into forced obedience.
Cultural celebrities and icons come and go, but their art often rings on for good or bad. Political propaganda, embedded in media projects, has transcended subliminal messages and now emphasizes in your face brashness. The breakdown of the traditional value society is so complete, that what was once viewed as insulting political disinformation now passes as a promotion for a loyalist NWO drama.
One such Showtime production is the pathetic Homeland series.
Rachel Shabi offers her review assessment in the piece; Does Homeland just wave the American flag?
“Instead, Homeland presents a retuned version of the same unshakeable assurance that, even when things are really complicated, American values are the fairest, the most right and the best. Sure, the series shows US forces doing terrible things: covering up a drone attack that kills civilians in Iraq; trigger-happy in a US mosque, leaving innocents dead there, too. But these are presented as necessary acts in pursuit of far worse crimes. Homeland’s core message is that the US means well, but sometimes has to do bad things; while the Arab and/or Muslim enemy doesn’t mean well and hence does unfathomably bad things. Not much of a progression really, is it?”
When the postmortem of the Patriotic Act era is dissected, the treason of intelligence community operations will be written in their full horror. The police state glorified in Homeland episodes is meant to prepare the public for the next stage of centralized oppression.
While cable or broadcast TV is so removed from Little House on the Prairie, today’s programming is designed to facilitate the psychological acceptance of the transition into a maximum lock down prison society.
In the essay, Mass Mind Control Through Network Television, Alex Ansary warns of the prison industrial complex.
“Turn on your local newscast. You have a few minutes of blue-collar crime, hardly any white collar crime, a few minutes of sports, misc. chit chat, random political jibber-jabber, and a look at the weather that no one is forecasting correctly. Is that what happened in your town? And we’re supposed to own the airwaves! The mainstream media openly supports the interests of the prison industrial complex. The stories focus on minority criminal groups, and exploit the real threat to appear much more dangerous than they are. Think about the growing per capita number of prisoners in the country. Then remember that this is happening at the same time that our prison boom began. The police on our streets have created criminals. The focus is to keep us in a state of fear, that way the elitists can attack any group they want to without fear of consequence. This is why the media is continuing to craft the timeless art of dehumanization.”
The cutting edge of mind control has long included the use of music and lyrics that produce subconscious meanings. Now the fascist messages in street music indoctrinate not only the youth but target to reinforce the despotic aspirations of TSA flunkies.
The article, The Transhumanist and Police State Agenda in Pop Music, provides two examples of globalist messages disguised as performances by Rihanna and Beyonce.
“In hip-hop slang, the term “hard” usually refers to someone who is street-savvy, gritty, rebellious and who is decisively “not down with police”. Hard transposes this term to a military context. Her militaristic video features a gang of uniformed men dancing under the orders of “General Rihanna”. We’ve come a long way from Public Enemy’s Fight the Power…it is now Submit to the Power. All of this military/dictatorial imagery is mixed with Rihanna’s sexy moves and outfits, appealing to the masses’ basest instinct: sex.”
“Beyonce walks on stage with a bunch of men dressed in riot gear… the type of unit a police state would use to repress opposition during popular turmoil. What are they doing in Beyonce’s performance? Contributing to permeate popular culture with police-state imagery.”
In the follow-up account, you can read the description mentioned in this report.
“Two recent examples of the perpetuation of the police state agenda in popular culture are Jay-Z and Kanye West’s music video No Church in the Wild and Adam Lambert’s Never Close our Eyes. In spite of, or perhaps because of, the fact that these songs are two different genres that aim to reach two different markets, they both contribute to the saturation of popular culture with police state imagery. While the authorities are not necessarily portrayed as the “good guys”, they are nevertheless there, as if their presence at any kind of public demonstration is normal.”
Contrast this dark brute force portrayal, with an age of optimism and hope. The peace and love themes in the music and political actions of John Lennon offer a rudimentary alternative to the grisly atrocities that the establishment commits routinely in the name of national security.
Gangster rap has little in common with All You Need is Love.
Rebellion of youth is natural, but resigned acceptance for submission to the police state is repression. The thirty-two years since his assassination has been one long road into oblivion. Read the “Interview With Investigative Reporter Jack Jones” for insights into the elimination of a dangerous messenger of peace.What a long way away from John Lennon’s lyrics in the song Revolution.
You say you’ll change the constitution
Well, you know
We all want to change your head
You tell me it’s the institution
Well, you know
You’d better free your mind instead
But if you go carrying pictures of Chairman Mao
You ain’t gonna make it with anyone anyhow
Now, transition from the mental liberation of the Beetle era, and go back and examine the overt war crimes of the premier American despot, Abraham Lincoln. Biographer and jingoism jezebel LBJ groupie, Doris Kearns Goodwin’s book, Team of Rivals: The Political Genius of Abraham Lincoln served as the backdrop of Steven Spielberg’s production of the recent released Lincoln film.
Alec Ryan writes in the American Renaissance:
“In the modern Hollywood narrative, all American history revolves around the Sacred Black Experience. Lincoln confirms this, bending historical truth to paint the most ruthless, bloody-minded, strong-willed American leader in history as some kind of smug, pre-post-modern storyteller croaking gamely through the difficulties like a paleface Obama sans teleprompter. The few Southerners are snarling, greasy bigots, recoiling before the erect, scowling black Union guards as they slink by during a meeting that led to the Hampton Roads peace conference of February 1865.
The film has throughout a sense of hushed awe, as if kowtowing to its own self-evident righteousness. There is no balance, no complexity, no sense of inner struggle or desperation. No opposing arguments. Its simplistic outlook more closely resembles the popcorn-psychology Avengers or Justice League rather than the serious historical movie that it clearly wishes to be acclaimed.”
The point of evaluating the worship adoration of the destroyer of the Republic with the authoritarianism of the newly re-elected president is to equate the despotism of both of their regimes. The imposition of the police state is part of the master plan to enslave the inherent autonomy of free citizens.
The insidious popular culture strips the institutions of traditional constitutional protections and separations of powers by diminishing the will of sovereign citizens to fight tyranny. The goal of imposing savage dehumanizing ruthlessness seeks to spread the Sons of Anarchy mindset into positions of authority. The merging of law enforcement into the ranks of criminal organizations becomes a common occurrence in the police state environment.
Once upon a time, the peace officer maintained order and balance. Now law enforcement deems that natural rights are arbitrary and conditional on obedience to government dictates.
911 provided the excuse to inflict a “War of Terror” under the disguise of national security. The Homeland program scripts that foster the ends justify the means are repugnant to every liberty advocate. Each day, the evolving police state is becoming more invasive and punitive.
A culture that glorifies jack booted thugs that order innocent citizens around as sinister terrorists destroys the essence of the nation. The New World Order essentially uses depressing indoctrination of the inevitability for submission to their mind game matrix.
The walking dead that accept a dependent society administered by bureaucratic goons, willingly tolerant a fate of bondage. Since texting is all the rage and the written language is sorely deficient, maybe the best way to communicate though the popular culture is to withdraw from the experience as much as possible. Try one on one contact; you might be surprised with the results.
“There are only two choices: A police state in which all dissent is suppressed or rigidly controlled; or a society where law is responsive to human needs. If society is to be responsive to human needs, a vast restructuring of our laws is essential.” – William Orville Douglas
SARTRE is the pen name of James Hall, a reformed, former political operative. This pundit’s formal instruction in History, Philosophy and Political Science served as training for activism, on the staff of several politicians and in many campaigns. A believer in authentic Public Service, independent business interests were pursued in the private sector. As a small business owner and entrepreneur, several successful ventures expanded opportunities for customers and employees. Speculation in markets, and international business investments, allowed for extensive travel and a world view for commerce. He is retired and lives with his wife in a rural community. ”Populism” best describes the approach to SARTRE’s perspective on Politics. Realities, suggest that American Values can be restored with an appreciation of “Pragmatic Anarchism.” Reforms will require an Existential approach. “Ideas Move the World,” and SARTRE’S intent is to stir the conscience of those who desire to bring back a common sense, moral and traditional value culture for America. Not seeking fame nor fortune, SARTRE’s only goal is to ask the questions that few will dare … Having refused the invites of an academic career because of the hypocrisy of elite’s, the search for TRUTH is the challenge that is made to all readers. It starts within yourself and is achieved only with your sincere desire to face Reality. So who is SARTRE? He is really an ordinary man just like you, who invites you to join in on this journey. Visit his website at http://batr.org.
By: Michael Maharrey | The Tenth Amendment Center –
A bill that would heavily diminish the effect of federal programs that militarize local police was signed into law on Thursday.
Introduced by Rep. Nicholas Schwaderer (R-Superior), House Bill 330 (HB330) bans state or local law enforcement from receiving significant classes of military equipment from the Pentagon’s “1033 Program.” It passed by a 46-1 vote in the state Senate and by a 79-20 vote in the state House. On Thursday, Gov. Steve Bullock signed it into law.
The new law will prohibit state or local law enforcement agencies from receiving drones that are armored, weaponized, or both; aircraft that are combat configured or combat coded; grenades or similar explosives and grenade launchers; silencers; and “militarized armored vehicles” from federal military surplus programs.
But, as The Guardian reported last fall, handouts of such equipment from the Pentagon are far from the only way that the federal government has been militarizing local police. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) grants used to purchase such equipment amount to three times the value of the equipment given away by the Pentagon.
HB330 closes this loophole by banning law enforcement agencies from purchasing such military equipment with federal grants. They could continue to purchase them, but would have to use state or local funds, and the agencies would have to give public notice within 14 days of a request for any such local purchase.
“This foundation sets a massive precedent in Montana and the country as to what kind of society we want to have,” Schwaderer said of his bill. “If you get to the point where you need a grenade launcher, we’ve got the National Guard.”
Last month, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie signed a bill into law that, while not as comprehensive as the Montana bill, prohibits receipt of equipment from the 1033 program without an express authorization from the local governing body. This made his state the first to take a step towards stopping the federal militarization of police.
“By making it a local decision, the New Jersey law is a great first step, but the Montana law takes things to the next level,” said Mike Maharrey of the Tenth Amendment Center. “It closes loopholes and covers almost all the bases. The next step would be to expand the equipment banned, and we’re hopeful that good people in Montana will work on that next session.”
FEDERAL SURPLUS AND GRANT MONEY
Through the federal 1033 Program, local police departments procure military grade weapons, including automatic assault rifles, body armor and mine resistant armored vehicles – essentially unarmed tanks. Police departments can even get their hands on military helicopters and other aircraft.
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) runs the “Homeland Security Grant Program,” which in 2013 gave more than $900 million in counterterrorism funds to state and local police. According to a 2012 Senate report, this money has been used to purchase tactical vehicles, drones, and even tanks with little obvious benefit to public safety. And, according to ProPublica, “In 1994, the Justice Department and the Pentagon funded a five-year program to adapt military security and surveillance technology for local police departments that they would otherwise not be able to afford.”
Local agencies almost never have the funds needed to purchase this kind of equipment, and federal money is the only way they can afford it. By banning purchases with federal funding, HB330 would effectively nullify the effect of such federal “grant” programs.
COMMAND AND CONTROL
Arming ‘peace officers’ like they’re ready to occupy an enemy city is totally contrary to the society envisioned by the Founders. They’ve turned ‘protect and serve’ into ‘command and control.’
In the 1980s, the federal government began arming, funding and training local police forces, turning peace officers into soldiers to fight in its unconstitutional “War on Drugs.” The militarization went into hyper-drive after 9/11 when a second front opened up – the “War on Terror.”
By stripping state and local police of this military-grade gear and requiring them to report on their acquisition and use, it makes them less likely to cooperate with the feds and removes incentives for partnerships.
“Sunshine is the salve of good government,” Schwaderer said.
That is exactly what HB330 will start to bring to Montana.
For other states: Take action to push back against federal militarization of your police at this link.
The Tenth Amendment Center, based in Los Angeles, seeks to limit federal power through action in the states.
If You Think Jade Helm’s Bad, Wait Till You Hear About The Presidential Police Force Established On The Heels Of Jade Helm! It’s About To Get Wild! (VIDEOS)
By: Lisa Haven | Lisa Haven News –
On December 18, 2014, President Barack Obama secretly signed an executive order creating a Presidential Task Force geared at 21st Century Policing. This Force seeks not only to identify ways for police departments to better themselves but also promotes increased interaction of our local police officers in our schools, businesses, communities and many other aspects of our lives. The main objective of the force is to get the public acquainted with their presence and to establish a trust connection in communities.
While this all sounds like “sunshine and lollipops” we must consider this a step towards the integration of preparation for martial law. Considering this task force comes on the heels of Jade Helm—who’s object it is to gain public trust as well— we must consider the possibility. What are the chances that both Jade Helm, (a military training exercise) and the Presidential Task Force for the 21st Century (a police objective report) are geared at gaining the publics trust? Could there be a link between them and martial law preparation? Or am I thinking too much into it?
Here is the breaking report….
According to Jade Helm one of the main objectives for the Military is to: “…work with civilians to gain their trust and an understanding of the issues.”
According to the Presidential Task Force for the 21st Century Policing Report the main objective is to promote: “Trust between law enforcement agencies and the people they protect and serve…” It further states that “People are more likely to obey the law when they believe those who are enforcing it have the right—the legitimate authority—to tell them what to do.” (page1)
The report also exposes the goal of having local police highly involved in our communities, schools, businesses and lives on a daily basis, “The mission of the task force is to examine how to foster strong, collaborative relationships between local law enforcement and the communities they protect…” (page 1)
These similarities are striking! And while it seems like a good thing, the question needs to be asked; why is their an uptick in readying the community to trust the military through Jade Helm and the police force through the Presidential Task Force? Do they fear something is around the corner?
But that’s not all the Presidential Task Force Report Reveals. I also found these interesting facts enclosed in the document:
Pages 2 and 3 describe seven sessions conducted as a result of this task force that discuss a wide range of recommendations from faith leaders, law enforcement, academics, and more. It includes:
- Building Trust and Legitimacy (gaining trust of community)
- Policy and Oversight (policies)
- Technology and Social Media (How to use technology to help police and privacy issues)
- Community Policing and Crime Reduction (community policing and more trust building.)
- Training and Education (Of which Jade Helm is a part of, just how to train)
- Officer Safety and Wellness
- Future of Community Policing (how to implement procedures)
Some recommendations on how to implement the above polices are as follows:
“The President create a National Crime and Justice Task Force to review and evaluate all components of the criminal justice system of rate purpose of making recommendations to the country on comprehensive criminal justice reform.” (pg. 3) It further stated the reason why was because “the justice system alone cannot solve many of the underlying conditions that give rise to crime. It will be through partnerships across sectors and at every level of government that we will find the effective and legitimate long-term solutions to ensuring public safety.” (pg. 4)
This clearly could indicate a future partnership of sorts between the local law enforcement, the federal government, and even branches of local businesses, churches, schools, etc. The problem with this is that it could turn into a mesh pot of information gathered against each individual kicking our privacy issues out the door. Further when our local police are continually interacting through “partnerships” we are likely to see an increase in police activity in our cities. Here are a few more recommendations promoting such interactions:
“Community policing should be infused throughout the culture and organizational structure of law enforcement agencies.” (pg. 43)
“Law enforcement agencies should develop programs that create opportunities for patrol officers to regularly interact with neighborhood residents, faith leaders, and business leaders.” ()
“Law enforcement agencies should work with schools to develop and monitor school discipline policies with input and collaboration from school personnel, students, families, and community members. These policies should prohibit the use of corporal punishment and electronic control devices.” ()
“Communities and law enforcement agencies should restore and build trust between youth and police by creating programs and projects for positive, consistent, and persistent interaction between youth and police.” (pg. 50)
“The U.S. Department of Justice should explore public-private partnership opportunities, starting by convening a meeting with local, regional, and national foundations to discuss the proposals for reform described in this report and seeking their engagement and support in advancing implementation of these recommendations.” (pg. 71)
Am I reading to much into this? Or is there a link to be made? I guess the ultimate decision is yours. But either way, don’t say I didn’t warn you!
Here is the video clip of the FEMA Camp Roundup Drill in Florida (Video by NextNewsNetwork):
For More Information See:
Task Force Stream: http://www.taskforceonpolicing.us/
Task Force Document: http://www.cops.usdoj.gov/pdf/taskforce/Interim_TF_Report.pdf
1033 Program Through NDAA: http://fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/R43701.pdf
Executive Order: http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=108088
Article republished with permission from Lisa Haven News
By: Nadia Kayyali | Electronic Frontier Foundation –
There are some very disturbing videos circulating the Internet right now, depicting the deaths of unarmed civilians at the hands of trained, armed men. Many of these videos even show individuals being shot in the back, or as they try to flee.
These are videos of police officers in America killing unarmed black men like Oscar Grant and Eric Garner. And, as the most recent case shows, without these recordings, much of America might not have any idea exactly how much of a problem this is.
Citizen videos of law enforcement encounters are more valuable than ever. And for those who are wondering—it is legal to record the police.
The police don’t always seem aware of this. There have been incidents across the country of police telling people to stop filming, and sometimes seizing their camera or smartphone, or even arresting them, when they don’t comply.
In the most recent citizen-filmed incident to gain widespread media attention, on April 4, white police officer Michael Slager shot and killed 50-year-old black man Walter Scott in the back as he ran away in North Charleston, South Carolina. Bystander Feiden Santana filmed the encounter, which started with a traffic stop. After Santana’s video surfaced, the officer was arrested and charged with murder. Santana said that he is scared of what might happen to him. He also considered deleting the video, and doing nothing with it. And Santana is not the only person who may be intimidated by the prospect of filming the police, with good reason.
That’s why, in addition to EFF Attorney Sophia Cope’s legal analysis highlighting some of the recent case law establishing the right to film police officers, we’re sharing some basic information cop watchers should know.
What Courts Have Said
Courts across the country have held that there is a First Amendment right to openly record the police. Courts have also held, however, that individuals cannot interfere with police operations, and that wiretapping statutes that prohibit secretly recording may apply to recording the police. But underlying these decisions is the understanding that recording the police is constitutionally protected.
Know Your Rights and Be Safe
While it has been established that individuals have the right to record the police, what happens on the street frequently does not match the law. Also, if you’re thinking about filming the police, it’s likely you’ll have more police encounters than you otherwise would.
The National Lawyers Guild (NLG) is a bar association that does police accountability work. The National Lawyers Guild Legal Observer program is focused on watching the police at protests. CopBlock and Cop Watch are loosely organized groups that have chapters across the country, and provide resources on filming the police everyday.
Here are the most essential things to keep in mind:
- Stay calm and courteous, even though the situation may be stressful. Remember—if you get arrested or get into an altercation with the police, you won’t be able to keep filming them!
- Be sure that you are not interfering with police operations, and stand at a safe distance from any encounter you film.
- Your right to record audio surreptitiously of police carrying out their duties in public may vary from state to state. You should check your state law to know the fullest extent of your rights, but the lowest risk way to record is to hold your device in plain view of the officers.
- Do not lie to police officers. If they ask whether you are recording, answer honestly.
- If the police start interacting with you, treat the encounter as you would any encounter with law enforcement—in fact, you may want to be extra careful, since as the repeated incidents of police seizing cameras and smartphones demonstrate, it may make you more of a target.
- If you are at a demonstration, police will often issue a dispersal order—in general, they will declare a protest an unlawful assembly and tell people to leave. Unless you are granted permission to stay, that order applies to you, too. If you do not comply, you should expect to be arrested.
- While it is not legal for an officer to order you to move because you are recording, they may still order you to move. If you do not comply you could be arrested. If you do want to comply, consider complying with the smallest movement possible, and verbally confirming that you are complying with their orders. For example, if you are standing five feet from an officer, and they say “You need to move back,” you might want to consider calmly saying “yes, officer, I am moving back” while taking a few steps back.
Below are some helpful resources and tips related to interacting with and filming the police from these groups and EFF:
- The National Lawyers Guild (NLG) “Know Your Rights” pamphlet (available in multiple languages) provides basic information you should know for interacting with the police.
- The NLG Legal Observer Program training manual has tips for filming the police at protests, many of which are useful for filming any encounter.
- Cop Watch has resources and examples here.
- EFF’s Know Your Rights guide provides information on what you need to know if the police want to search your electronic devices.
Why Focus on Citizen Recording When Departments Are Implementing Bodycams?
As the conversation about police accountability continues to take place across the country, body cameras are often proposed as a solution, and they are getting a lot of attention in the news right now. “Bodycam” recordings have made a difference in some cases. But many transparency and accountability advocates including EFF, have expressed reasonable doubts about their efficacy. States are trying to grapple with the many privacy issues they raise, mostly by considering exempting the footage from public records act requests. And while “bodycams” may be a contentious subject, there’s little doubt that it is citizen footage of law enforcement encounters that has really fueled the current debate about police accountability.
As North Charleston Pastor Nelson Rivers said: “If not for the video, we would still be following the narrative from the officer. If not for this video, the story would be entirely different.” Scott’s family agrees. After watching the video, his brother stated: “I think that if that man never showed the video we would not be at the point that we’re at right now.” And North Charleston Councilwoman Dorothy Williams had this to say: “I’m asking all the citizens of North Charleston to continue taping.”
You don’t have to live in North Charleston to know why that’s a good idea.
Disclosure: Nadia Kayyali serves as the Vice-President for the National Lawyers Guild SF Bay Area Chapter, has served on the NLG’s national board, and has been involved with the NLG legal observer program nationally for over four years.
Smart meters are now being used by authorities to crack down on “water wasters” in the state of California, but this is just the tip of the iceberg as far as what they can be used for. Ultimately, smart meters are designed to be part of an entire “smart grid” that will enable government bureaucrats “to control everything from your dishwasher to thermostat“. And in recent years, there has been a massive push to install smart meters in as many homes in the United States and Europe as possible. Back in December 2007, there were only 7 million smart meters installed in this country. Today there are more than 51 million. On the other side of the Atlantic, the European Parliament has set a goal of having smart meters in 80 percent of all homes by the year 2020. This is being promoted as the “green” thing to do, but could it be possible that there is more to these smart meters than meets the eye?
In Long Beach, California authorities were getting complaints that a local McDonald’s restaurant was wasting water in the middle of the night.
So what did the authorities do?
They installed a smart meter which instantly started providing incriminating evidence against McDonald’s. The following comes from CBS Los Angeles…
The Long Beach Water Department says sprinklers at a McDonald’s restaurant on Bellflower Boulevard went on for 45 minutes at a time, twice a night, for an undefined number of nights. Complaints continued to mount as water pooled and wasted. The department, however, could do little about the wasting.
That was before the smart meter.
Since its installation in February, Long Beach Water Department General Manager Kevin Wattier says he saw an immediate spike by tens of thousands of gallons, each time McDonald’s overwatered their property.
And according to NPR, other large California cities are also now looking into how they can use smart meters to enforce the new mandatory water restrictions in the state…
By next February, California cities together are supposed to cut their water use by a quarter. Sacramento, San Francisco and some Central Valley cities are also seeing whether smart meters can help.
But smart meters are capable of determining far more than whether or not we are using too much water.
Already, police all over the country are using the data provided by smart meters to identify homes that are potentially growing marijuana. Homes that grow marijuana tend to use much more electricity than other homes, and so if your home is using a high level of energy that is a red flag for the cops.
In addition, there are a whole host of other ways that smart meters can be used as surveillance devices by law enforcement. The following list comes from an electronics and media expert from Burbank, California named Jerry Day…
1. They individually identify electrical devices inside the home and record when they are operated causing invasion of privacy.
2. They monitor household activity and occupancy in violation of rights and domestic security.
3. They transmit wireless signals which may be intercepted by unauthorized and unknown parties. Those signals can be used to monitor behavior and occupancy and they can be used by criminals to aid criminal activity against the occupants.
4. Data about occupant’s daily habits and activities are collected, recorded and stored in permanent databases which are accessed by parties not authorized or invited to know and share that private data.
5. Those with access to the smart meter databases can review a permanent history of household activities complete with calendar and time-of-day metrics to gain a highly invasive and detailed view of the lives of the occupants.
6. Those databases may be shared with, or fall into the hands of criminals, blackmailers, law enforcement, private hackers of wireless transmissions, power company employees, and other unidentified parties who may act against the interests of the occupants under metered surveillance.
7. “Smart Meters” are, by definition, surveillance devices which violate Federal and State wiretapping laws by recording and storing databases of private and personal activities and behaviors without the consent or knowledge of those people who are monitored.
8. It is possible for example, with analysis of certain “Smart Meter” data, for unauthorized and distant parties to determine medical conditions, sexual activities, physical locations of persons within the home, vacancy patterns and personal information and habits of the occupants.
If all of that wasn’t bad enough, there are also substantial concerns about the impact that these smart meters are having on our health…
According to physician and epidemiologist Sam Milham, Smart Meters, which are linked to an array of health issues, emit as much as 100 times the amount of radiation as a cell phone.
Daniel Hirsch, a senior lecturer on nuclear policy at UCSC, says the federal government purposely misleads the public by conducting biased safety studies at the behest of power companies.
A Washington DC power company stirred controversy in 2013 after they were caught lying to the public about how often their smart meters emitted radiation. Despite claims that the meters only emitted radiation once every 4 to 6 hours, an investigation by WUSA9 News revealed the frequency to be closer to 4 to 6 times every minute.
When there is that much radiation blasting through our homes on a continual basis, it is inevitable that there are going to be health problems.
According to Infowars, tens of thousands of people have already reported significant health issues that they believe are directly related to the installation of smart meters in their homes…
Tens of thousands of individuals are reporting officially, to governments and utilities, that they are experiencing illness or functional impairments following the installation of “smart” meters. Reported symptoms include headaches, sleep problems, ear ringing, focus difficulties, fatigue, heart palpitations, nausea and statistically abnormal recurrences of cancer.
Perhaps you are dealing with one of the health issues just mentioned.
If so, you might want to check to see if you have a smart meter in your home.
There has got to be a better way for the state of California to monitor water usage rather than smart meters.
And without a doubt, the state of California is facing a crisis of unprecedented proportions. The snowpack in the Sierras is only 5 percent of the long-term historical average. Snow levels are currently at the lowest levels ever measured for this time of the year, and the snow is melting five to 30 days earlier than normal. For much more on the nightmare that the state is dealing with, please see my previous article entitled “How Many People Will Have To Migrate Out Of California When All The Water Disappears?”
Thankfully, there is a lot of waste that can be eliminated, so a lot of water can potentially be saved. It turns out that Californians are some of the biggest water wasters on the entire planet. The following statistic comes from the New York Times…
California’s cities consume 178 gallons per person per day, on average. That’s 40 percent more than the per capita water consumption in New York City and more than double that of parched Sydney, in Australia.
So let’s hope that Californians start banding together and begin using water more wisely, because this drought is not likely to go away any time soon.
And the truth is that what is going on in the state of California is kind of a microcosm of the water crisis that is beginning to emerge all over the globe…
The move by California to require mandatory cuts in water use for the first time in its history has highlighted the world’s looming water crisis and increased the focus on the links between sustainable water and sustainable energy.
“We need a new paradigm,” says Steven Solomon, author of Water: The Epic Struggle for Wealth, Power and Civilization. “The days when we could just go further into the mountains and find new sources of water are past. We need to make better use of the water we have.”
In the end, the drought in California is going to affect all of us. A tremendous amount of our produce is grown in the state, and we will all soon be feeling the pain of the drought in our local grocery stores…
As California’s multi-year drought rages on, consumers in the rest of the United States may soon be feeling the pinch at the grocery store as farmers around California reduce water and plant fewer crops.
California, sometimes called the ‘nation’s salad bowl’, is the country’s largest producer of grapes, kiwis, olives, avocados, broccoli, tomatoes, spinach, tree nuts and dairy. Now in the fourth year of a massive drought ‒ and facing only a year’s worth of water remaining in the state ‒ food prices in the US and agricultural unemployment in California are set to climb as farmers do what they can to conserve water and protect their investments.
So what do you think about all of this?
Please feel free to add to the discussion by posting a comment below…
Michael T. Snyder is a graduate of the McIntire School of Commerce at the University of Virginia and has a law degree and an LLM from the University of Florida Law School. He is an attorney that has worked for some of the largest and most prominent law firms in Washington D.C. and who now spends his time researching and writing and trying to wake the American people up. You can follow his work on The Economic Collapse blog, End of the American Dream and The Truth Wins. His new novel entitled “The Beginning Of The End” is now available on Amazon.com.
First I want to say that many corporate (security) sympathizers tend to defend private policing, but this article will debunk all their arguments here and show how private policing is the end-all end-game ultimate threat to freedom in America and humanity as a whole, all in the name of protecting corporate profits $$ while working hand in hand with government for their greater long term new world order plans.
In 2014 I covered the rising threat of private security now arresting American citizens in the streets of America after witnessing firsthand the arrest of a gentleman in Hollywood California. The private security company looked very threatening with guns, bullet proof vests and the whole tyranny outfit. The frightening scene looked more like a SWAT military situation with around 10-15 fully armed agents and multiple nearly unmarked cars only there were no tanks or machine guns that I saw. To my chagrin, a closer looked showed that no police was present, all of this was being done in the name of private police!
Since this article and accompanying video, I’ve been attacked by some with comments claiming this is no big deal, that I’m exaggerating, an idiot, a fool and that I don’t know what I’m talking about because private security is a good thing. Let’s take a look at the issue more closely.
To add some historic perspective, private security has been around in the U.S. since at least the late 1800’s. Private security boomed in the early 20th century and by the 1930’s private security companies were becoming a problem due to their questionable tactics. According to one research site:
The early twentieth century might be thought of as a golden age of private detective firms. The Pinkerton Agency, for example, is credited with influencing the development of investigation techniques used by the public police through its systems of surveillance and its development of a file system that was used by the Federal Bureau of Investigation until it developed its own case file system (Sklansky 1999; Draper 1978; O’Reilly and Ellison 2004). Indeed, it was not until the 1930s that private security stature and legitimacy came to be questioned. A significant event in this process was the establishment of the La Follette Committee to investigate threats to civil liberties (particularly labor-related threats) associated with the private security industry. A particular cause for concern was Pinkerton’s use of espionage techniques and other methods to break strikes and monitor industrial activities.
As you can see, back in the 1930’s private security was already corrupt, helping police and government to spy on citizens illegally. All in the name of profits and long term government agenda. Even back then, the citizens were the enemy and government agenda and profits were the goal. Since way back then up to this day private security is sold to Americans as a tool for “safety” and this is a lie we’ll deal with later.
One thing that should concern all American citizens is the rate of growth of private security/police. According to a series of reports by Hallcrest known as ”Hallcrest Report I: Private Security and Police in America” and ”Hallcrest Report II: Private Security Trends 1970-2000,” which were published in 1985 and 1990 respectively, private security back then already outnumbered public police by about 3:1 ratio. Similarly, according to Wikipedia by 1990 private security constituted three quarters of all police in America.
So without a doubt the concept of private security is looked upon favorably by government who always works with corporations to get their agenda done. This exponential rising of private security should alarm everyone that it is all by design not by coincidence. The argument of “free enterprise” cannot be applied here. This is policing of we-the-people, it fits in with government’s desire to control the people and government has been involved in this growth from the beginning working hand in hand with private security unlike a service or product that is truly a result of the free market.
Debunking the rationalization of private policing
Undeniably, private police expand exponentially the amount of police personnel available to control, surveil, snitch, report, punish, arrest, fine and detain civilians. This exponential policing plays into the police state and the new world order plans perfectly. Despite all of this, some people who defend private policing are resorting to same handful of excuses to rationalize or justify the need for private police. Here are some of the claims made.
1- Private police are more “trustworthy” than public police
Those that defend private policing claim that private police are more trust worthy than public police. This is an ad hominem based on assumptions and not based on any actual evidence. This ad hominem excuse takes a known problem (police are corrupt) and uses this known problem to leap to an unproven conclusion- that private security must somehow be more honest. As noted above, private police had integrity and ethical issues going back to the early part of the 20th century and that has never changed. Private security benefited as much or more than any other industry after 9/11 and there is no reason to think they are honest, have integrity or have an incentive to look out for individual citizens and freedom.
Let’s not forget that private police do not take an oath to defend the U.S. Constitution. They are not sworn to protect citizens, they are sometimes (depending where they work) expected to defend “customers” but that is only related to ‘customer relations’ which is ultimately related to corporate profits. The idea that a group of people who only answer to a for-profit corporation can be trusted to defend basic human rights, human dignity, and freedom when it is clearly not in their job description or call of duty is entirely unrealistic and naive.
2- Private police serve the “greater good”
Those defending private policing claim that the private police, specifically those part of BID or Business Improvement Districts which are now being given the power to arrest American citizens on the streets serve the neighborhood and act as good ambassadors. They argue as if private security is a virtuous well meaning entity only interested in peace and love. Where have we heard this before? Government has been claiming this for years- ‘Government is good, government cares about you…’ and so on. And anyone paying attention knows these are just lies to pacify anyone stupid enough to think that government (or private security) actually cares about you. Thus the private security/private police advocates are playing the exact same card claiming it’s for the greater good of the neighborhood and it’s all lies and theater. They operate for the greater good of profits and to support the rising police state and new world order nothing else.
As for the actual private security officers, the foot soldiers on the streets, they are being lied to just like our military is lied to. The illusion that public police are lied to and military are lied to for the greater agenda but that somehow private police are not lied to, is naive and ignorant. Those defending private policing are thus only seeing the narrow picture and ignoring what is really happening with the rise of the police state and tyranny. That’s the police state and the rising tyranny that their bosses won’t tell them about. Their job, just like the military, is to shut up and do as they are told. When will people finally realize that it’s ALL about money and power?
3- Private police/security keep neighborhoods “safe”
This brings up the importance of distinguishing between “feeling” safe versus actual crime drops. Yes people “feel” safer with private security but is this based on any reality? Doesn’t the control system deliberately keep the people in fear in order to justify more and more policing, all for your supposed own “safety”??
If you ask me, constitutionally speaking, citizens have the right to protect themselves and provide their own safety. If we needed to be kept safe from danger this is all the more reason for average citizens to exercise their 2nd Amendment rights to bear arms. The notion that you need to be kept safe by a 3rd party for-profit group of people is a joke and a deception to justify the police state while increasing profits.
With that said, studies have been done in the past evaluating the crime drop effect of the Guardian Angels in the 1970’s in San Diego. At least one study showed that the neighborhoods not policed by the Guardian Angels showed LESS crimes than those policed by the Guardian Angels. As expected people said they felt “safer” and “property” crime specifically dropped.
They seem to cut crime a bit. The most detailed research on their activities compared an area of San Diego patrolled by the Angels with a part of the city where they were absent. Surprisingly, violent crime fell more in the “ordinary” area than in the one patrolled by the Angels. But property crime fell much more in the area where the Angels operated. One finding though, was unequivocal: 60% of residents said they felt safer thanks to the youngsters’ presence.
Once again, this serves as a reminder that the “safety” sold by these private for-profit corporations is about keeping property safe not people safe. It’s also about giving private for-profit corporations LEGAL power over you. It’s a corporate takeover in many ways. Corporations have long wanted this power and more than ever now they see a chance to truly have power over you.
More problems with private police
The fact of the matter is that once we accept the concept of private police roaming the streets of America with power to arrest and detain as the private military corporation Blackwater had in Iraq, the sky is the limit for these corrupt corporations working with government as we saw with Blackwater aka Academy, XE. Remember, as with Blackwater/Academy/XE there is no guarantee that these private police will do what is moral, ethical, or what is right because they are entirely unregulated and unaccountable to the public. They only answer to a corporate for-profit entity. If you think public police, who actually take an oath to defend the Constitution, are corrupt, wait till the UN-accountable private police mafia becomes the norm. Corruption is a human problem not a public police problem and it is everywhere and any American who naively accepts this new private police paradigm is literally signing off on the end of America.
Private police is not militia
Do not confuse the concept of private militias with private corporate for-profit police. Huge difference! Some people are trying to defend private police by painting them out to be equivalent to the militia “for the people”. Don’t go for this. The idea of a militia, which not surprisingly the government opposes (think Bundy Ranch standoff), is designed to guard the people of the republic from a tyrannical government. Private police on the other hand, are contributing to the concept of tyrannical government and would never align themselves against a corrupt government.
Ask yourself, why is our government so eager to give power to private police? So eager the practice goes back over 100 years? Why are private police never portrayed by the mainstream media as un-American, potential threat to freedom or a potential terror threat like they portray the militias??
If and when it all goes down (SHTF), if and when order is lost and tyranny and martial law completely takes over, you can be sure all of these unregulated, unconstitutional private security working for these for-profit corporations endorsed by big government will act as an extension of government. Anyone who thinks otherwise is fooling themselves.
The rise of these never-to-be-trusted for-profit private police with the power to arrest is thus a major threat to America any way you look at it and every American better be ready and do what you can now to oppose this course we are on. Those defending this agenda, like those who defend endless war and fake terror will argue violently to defend both their profits and the long term agenda that guarantees them a seat at the table of power and tyranny so don’t be fooled.
Don’t forget that Hitler had his private police also who operated under private rules and committed atrocities. Private mercenaries have arguably a bloodier history than public police and armies. The lessen to learn here is that humans can be corrupt and humans under the control of a tyrant or tyrannical empire will do as they are told.
Psychology experiments have proven this over and over again. Humans will do as they are told even if it means harming, illegally detaining, arresting, even torturing or murdering someone in the name of “I was told to do it”.
So as the rise of the nearly invisible threat of private police continues in America let’s remember the past days when it was ‘only’ the public police killing the innocent and the general public was able to identify public police corruption and stand up to it. Let’s remember how bad it was when the “regulated” police was killing everyone without consequences. Let’s remember when the evil and corruption was still quantifiable because when the rise of private police is done, the corruption and evil will be so impossible to stop or even quantify that we will all be in danger.
Just imagine how easy it will be for big government to reach into your life when anyone can don a uniform and claim to be “private police”. This is the same government who has created, armed and funded Al Qaeda and ISIS. Think about this- What will you do when private police begin to wear masks to hide their faces for “protective” reasons just like the riot police do now? What about when a few false flags result in the new regulation that allows private police to have military gear? Get the picture? Anyone who thinks this is not the road we are on is lying to you and to themselves and probably just defending private security and private police profits.
Consider that since 9/11 the U.S. has spend billions of dollars on so called Private Military Corporations or PMC’s. If the U.S. government is willing to fund privatization of murder in other countries why would they not do it at home? Think. Who are these companies who are being given the authority to arrest U.S. citizens in the streets of America? What ties do they have to government?
Finally, what we are seeing is Obama’s promise to recruit a private army of civilians come to pass. Amazing isn’t it? With all the campaign promises broken, THIS ONE he keeps! In his campaign Obama said:
“We cannot continue to rely only on our military…we’ve got to have a civilian security force just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded. We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives we’ve set.”
This was in the plans all along. So what will you do when the day comes that someone knocks on your door and it’s not the police? They’re armed, they’re scary and they’re looking for you but it’s not police, it’s outsourced private police. Who will you turn to then?
In the end, this is all part of the new world order where the life and freedom of the individual is expendable. Where the individual has no rights and is just a pawn in a bigger scheme of profits, power and control. Speak up now or forever hold your peace. The takeover is underway from within, can you hear the footsteps coming? Can you see the cage with your name on it from here? Or perhaps you can see your name on that tombstone with the words engraved “Live free or die”.
Bernie Suarez is a revolutionary writer with a background in medicine, psychology, and information technology. He has written numerous articles over the years about freedom, government corruption and conspiracies, and solutions. A former host of the 9/11 Freefall radio show, Bernie is also the creator of the Truth and Art TV project where he shares articles and videos about issues that raise our consciousness and offer solutions to our current problems. His efforts are designed to encourage others to joyfully stand for truth, to expose government tactics of propaganda, fear and deception, and to address the psychology of dealing with the rising new world order. He is also a former U.S. Marine who believes it is our duty to stand for and defend the U.S. Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic. A peace activist, he believes information and awareness is the first step toward being free from enslavement from the globalist control system which now threatens humanity. He believes love conquers all fear and it is up to each and every one of us to manifest the solutions and the change that you want to see in this world, because doing this is the very thing that will ensure victory and restoration of the human race from the rising global enslavement system, and will offer hope to future generations.
By: Matt Agorist | The Free Thought Project –
Burlington, IA — Two months ago the Free Thought Project broke the story of Autumn Steele, an Iowa mother who was killed by a police officer in front of her husband and child.
Gabriel Steele, Autumn’s husband, was loading up their 4-year-old son, when the couple’s dog came playfully running out of the house. Officer Jesse Hill was at the Steele residence acting as an escort in a domestic dispute incident when he saw the dog and feared for his life. He then pulled his sidearm and fired off at least two rounds.
Witnesses say that at this time the dog was being playful, but apparently still threatened the officer which caused him to draw his pistol and begin shooting.
One of the shots struck and killed Autumn Steele.
“The dog startled the officer. The officer began shooting at the dog. The officer was still shooting when he fell down in the snow,” one witness told The Hawk Eye Newspaper.
“It appeared he was shooting at the dog when (the officer) fell to the ground. It’s my belief the woman was shot accidentally,” said another witness.
Last week Des Moines County Attorney, Amy Beavers released a seven-page report detailing the reasons why Officer Hill will not face charges for killing Autumn Steele.
According to the Des Moines Register:
Beaver’s report makes reference to her rationale for not charging Hill with crimes that clearly aren’t supported by the evidence, such as felony involuntary manslaughter, which requires the commission of some other crime at the time of the homicide, and murder. Her report makes no mention of misdemeanor involuntary manslaughter, which is imposed in cases where a “person unintentionally causes the death of another person by the commission of an act in a manner likely to cause death or serious injury.”
In her report, Beaver cited the fact that Hill is a police officer. Beaver says that he was in a difficult situation in which he was trying to stop a domestic dispute as well as protect himself from a dog. Being that he was a police officer, in this situation, he is entitled to special treatment, according to Beaver.
Does Beaver’s logic make any sense at all?
This was a clear-cut case of one person negligently taking the life of another person.
Try to imagine a situation in which a non-police officer shoots and kills their neighbor in their front yard, either accidentally or not. Then try to imagine this non-police officer escaping any and all accountability. It would not happen.
Police officers are supposedly highly trained professionals, prepped to make hasty decisions in volatile situations. This is a claim that we hear all the time from the police themselves as well as supporters. Being able to make this claim means that holding them less accountable than the average citizen, should never occur.
Because of their monopoly on the use of force, cops should be held to a much higher standard of conduct than the average citizen. Unfortunately, this is almost never the case.
The precedent set by the court’s decision, to let this officer off Scott Free, is worrisome. It has now become common practice for police officers to avoid all accountability by simply hiding behind the thin blue line.
First published by The Free Thought Project.
Why you should always film cops and what to do and NOT to do when pulled over.
Cops use robots to defuse bombs, confront barricaded suspects and rescue victims during disasters. But they also use robots that can see, record and track what you are doing all day long. If you aren’t paranoid by the thought of cops knowing your business, watch as Reason TV counts down 7 Creepy Robots for Cops.
By: Amanda Warren | Activist Post –
A North Carolina family asked Gastonia police to check in on a family member who was recovering from surgery. In an ideal world, this would be a wonderful service to be performed by police with a grateful community that would offer them thanks.
Unfortunately, these notions have nothing to do with the business model of modern day policing, which does not serve those it views as its enemy. Indeed, although it might be the public that helps keep the coffers full by various means, it is a public still viewed as the number one threat by the police who benefit from them – by various means.
By that concept, it should come as no surprise that the older man they were called out to check on was the very one they senselessly killed that day.
This past Saturday afternoon, the family asked for a welfare check on 74-year-old James Howard Allen, an Army veteran, as he was recovering from heart surgery. The officer first visited the house that night at 10:20 p.m. with no answer.
So of course the next line of action would be for Gastonia police to gather the fire department emergency medical services to bust into the home at 11:30 p.m. The chief said Officer Josh Lefevers announced himself before going into the back door and the officer alleges that Allen was pointing a gun.
With no-hesitation shooting tactics police are repetitively instructed with to ensure threats are eliminated immediately (especially unarmed family pets), one wonders of Allen was ever “challenged to lower the gun down” as the chief insists. “The gun was pointed in the direction of the officers and a shot was fired that fatally wounded him.” This vague but carefully crafted sentence was designed to paint a showdown with the officer having no other choice but self-defense from the gun that was pointed in their direction. (Also note the passivity – “a shot was fired that fatally wounded him.”)
The grieving family and friends who want real answers, did not use such word-painting as they view what happened entirely differently. They see a natural response to an aggressive break-in, and are angered that another solution wasn’t sought first.
Allen’s brother-in-law said:
(He) probably woke up, someone’s breaking in on me, so when you’re by yourself you try to protect yourself.
Allen’s friend related that he would have had the same reaction and said:
You kicked the man’s door in. He’s disoriented and he’s in his own house, privacy of his own home.
One neighbor, however, asked a pertinent question:
The thing I questioned is why make a wellness call at midnight?
While the N.C. State Bureau of Investigation will be looking into it, the typical standard for such situations is to simply put the officer on paid administrative leave for awhile.
By: Lily Dane | The Daily Sheeple –
On Tuesday night in Pasco, Washington, a homeless man was shot and killed by police.
His crime? Throwing rocks and running from police.
The man, 35-year-old Antonio Zambrano-Montes, was reportedly throwing rocks at cars at a busy intersection. Authorities said the man hit two police officers with stones and refused to comply with their orders.
From the Chicago Tribune:
Officers used a stun gun on the man, but it had no effect, Pasco Police Chief Bob Metzger said at a news conference. Because of his “threatening” behavior, officers fired their guns, he said.
There are at least two witness videos.
One witness, Dario Infante, 21, of Pasco, recorded video from a vehicle about 50 feet away as the scene unfolded.
In an email interview, he told the Chicago Tribune that he decided to start recording when he saw an officer trying to use a stun gun on the man:
Infante said he saw the man throw a few rocks at police officers but he didn’t see him hit any officers. Five “pops” are audible shortly after the video begins, and the man can be seen running away, across a street and down a sidewalk, pursued by three officers.
As the officers draw closer to the running man, he stops, turns around and faces them. Multiple “pops” are heard and the man falls to the ground.
“He didn’t throw any rocks after he started running,” Infante said.
Here’s the video Infante recorded:
A longer video uploaded to YouTube by Troy Waechter shows more detail of the aftermath of the shooting.
In the first video, notice that Zambrano-Montes had turned to face officers with his hands in front of him – and clearly was NOT holding a gun – when he was shot multiple times.
So, here we have two videos of multiple officers shooting a fleeing man at busy intersection with innocent bystanders everywhere.
Because a man was throwing rocks and running from them.
Endangering the lives of people at that intersection over…rock-throwing.
I’m sorry – I’m just trying to wrap my head around this.
Other witnesses spoke to the Chicago Tribune:
Witness Ben Patrick told the newspaper police fired at the man as his back was turned.
“I really thought they were just going walk up and tackle or tase him,” he said. “But they opened fire. His back was turned.”
Patrick’s wife, Shannon, also said the man was running away. The shooting happened in front of her young children.
“He turned around to take off running and the cops just shot him,” she said. “All he was trying to do was walk away.”
Carlos Sanchez, who witnessed the shooting from the grocery store parking lot, also said it looked like the man was running away from officers when he was killed.
“They started shooting and they kept on shooting him,” he said.
At a news conference on Wednesday, Chief Metzger said he backs the three officers involved in the shooting — Ryan Flanagan, Adam Wright and Adrian Alaniz, reports the Tri-City Herald:
“We always stand behind our officers unless they are proven (wrong),” Metzger said. “We are at this point doing a thorough investigation. If the officers are wrong they will be dealt with accordingly. If they are not wrong, that will also come out.”
The Tri-City Special Investigative Unit (which does not include Pasco police) is investigating the shooting and the Franklin County prosecutor will ultimately determine if the officers were justified.
The three officers have been placed on leave while the investigation is conducted.
Within the last six months, Pasco officers have been cleared in four other shootings, which left four men dead.
Contributed by Lily Dane of The Daily Sheeple. Lily Dane is a staff writer for The Daily Sheeple. Her goal is to help people to “Wake the Flock Up!”
By: Amanda Warren | Activist
It took investigation into security camera footage to prove that indeed, a Louisville, KY school officer was terrorizing and assaulting children. Unfortunately, it also took two different incidents before the situation was taken seriously.
This is worrying on many levels. The school resource officer at Olmsted Academy North Middle School was 31-year-old Jonathan Hardin, of the LMPD. He was not removed from the position after the first assault – another soon followed.
In January he pushed and punched a 13-year-old in the face, knocking the kid to the floor, whom he believed had cut in line in the cafeteria. He charged the student for menacing and resisting arrest (!) and acted on it under lies. The middle-schooler then had to be treated at Kosair Hospital.
He placed another student in a chokehold, cutting off blood flow to the brain and inducing unconsciousness – just a few days after the first incident.
But, instead of calling for medical help for the unconscious kid, Hardin placed him in handcuffs for the rest of the day. This resulted in brain injury. Other students witnessed more abuses involving physical contact.
While the officer was fired from the school post and was arrested for a few charges, it cannot be comforting to think it took two potentially deadly situations before acting on behalf of children in school. Hopefully parents will demand what should have already been taken for granted – that a person like this would never make it to that role to start. However, that possibility looks bleak….
Most faculty and staff in a public school are required to submit fingerprints, a background check, and often a drug test. Why is it that the very person in the school system expected to use deadly force if necessary does not undergo the same rigorous standards? Instead, kids are left in the midst of a ticking time-bomb. The menacing presence there is to remind them they carry no rights, dignity or privacy. There’s zero tolerance for every sort of acting-up including humor, friendliness or excess energy.
There should be zero tolerance for any such behavior not only from staff but especially an officer placed in a middle school. It appears the school system did not act quickly in the case and surely passed the buck. Although they made complaints to the LMPD supervisor and showed video footage, the officer was left to commit more violence. Before any of this took place, Hardin had already accumulated complaints with one dismissed. Is this where that line is – the line that cannot be crossed is stretched pretty far to allow child endangerment and brain damage before intervening.
It is absolutely chilling a public school would ever take the department at its word and place a maniac in a watch-post over children. The school has replaced the school officer, hopefully not from LMPD, which has a horrendous track record with brutality and indiscriminate shooting.
By: Carey Wedler | The Anti Media –
NEW YORK, NY- NYPD Commissioner Bill Bratton announced Thursday that 350 heavily armed NYPD officers, called the “Strategic Response Group,” will soon be patrolling protests and the city at large.
He said the new strain of hyper-armed police will be
“…equipped and trained in ways that our normal patrol officers are not. They’ll be equipped with all the extra heavy protective gear, with the long rifles and machine guns — unfortunately sometimes necessary in these instances.”
Bratton announced their purpose is specifically
“…designed for dealing with events like our recent protests, or incidents like Mumbai or what just happened in Paris.”
Lumping protesters in with terrorists, he said the permanent force will deal with “disorder control and counterterrorism protection capabilities.” It will allegedly assist on crime scenes and help with “crowd control and other large-scale events.”
It is not unusual for authorities to ramp up “security” efforts following attacks (such as the ax attack against officers in October), but the idea of machine-gun clad officers is disturbing, especially considering past NYPD abuses of protesters and other residents.
The federal government, which has attempted to feign concern with police brutality, is partially funding the militarized venture. The Department of Homeland Security is supplying resources, as is the city of New York. The Pentagon has previously provided machine guns, ammuniton, and other military gear to New York police and other local cops around the country.
The program is set to begin with two precincts in Queens and two in Manhattan, though Bratton did not specify when. During the announcement at a Police Foundation breakfast at the Mandarin Hotel, Bratton also said his plan was backed by both Mayor Bill de Blasio (who came under fire from cops last year) and the city council.
He said the effort is intended to improve police relations with communities since “regular” police will no longer be called from their local precincts to deal with protests and alleged security threats:
“For years we’ve been asking our officers to engage in the community, but we’ve never given them time to do it, or the training.”
Such “crises” will now be handled by the machine gunning cops (machine guns are banned for private citizens). Bratton has also previously asked the city for more tasers to “improve relations” by reducing fatal shootings.
In his Thursday announcement, Bratton additionally called on the MTA to install cameras on all subways-for safety, of course.
Unsurprisingly, there is outrage against the proposed plan. Priscilla Gonzalez, Organizing Director of Communities United for Police Reform, said Bratton’s
“…demands for less oversight of the NYPD and a more militarized police force that would use counter-terrorism tactics against protesters are deeply misguided and frankly offensive. We need an NYPD that is more accountable to New Yorkers and that stops criminalizing our communities, especially when people are taking to the streets to voice legitimate concerns about discriminatory and abusive policing. Despite growing evidence that discriminatory broken windows is a failed and harmful policing strategy, Commissioner Bratton stubbornly continues to defend and expand it.”
‘Hidden Agenda Within Intelligence Community Allowed Paris Attacks’ For A Police State With Grand Spy Powers
By: Mac Slavo | SHTFplan.com –
Former U.S. intelligence linguist and national security veteran Scott Rickard accused American intelligence of looking the other way to enable the Hebdo Charlie terrorist attacks in Paris that dominated headlines and reopened international talks to combat terrorism with increased spy powers.
Rickard, who claims to have worked under numerous operations including Signals Intelligence (SIGINT), Communications Security (COMSEC), Open Source Intelligence (OSINT), and Intelligence Surveillance and Reconnaissance (ISR), charged that members of the intelligence community were aware of the attacks before hand, but did not reveal information that could have stopped them, in order to further a “hidden agenda.”
That 3 minute interview can be viewed here.
During an interview with Press TV, Rickard stated:
“I think what we see here is an opportunity for intelligence communities to basically look the other way when targets like those are being active in scenarios [that] would benefit their agenda.”
“I think that there is also a lot of individuals in the intelligence community that have a hidden agenda that allow these types of things to occur.”
Rickard’s statements follow those of former Treasury Dept. official Paul Craig Roberts, who said the story of the attacks “didn’t wash” and had elements of a false flag operation, as well as reports of links between the Paris events and the CIA.
The motivation for allowing the attacks is clear enough – a renewed focus on counter terrorism and mass surveillance efforts. A shocked and outraged world is now prepared to yield more power to the state yet again, under yet another promise of safety and security.
“I think it’s more of a propaganda move, whether or not the actual individuals conducted it or not,” Rickard said.
“Some people in the intelligence community ‘allow’ these guys to commit or be accused of committing these types of activities in order to enable more military and more anti-terrorism activity and create a kind of scenario whereby global leaders are setting up photo-ops in Paris to make it look as if they are combining efforts.”
Scott Rickard, also a technologist and historian who has given TED talks, responded to the claims by Edward Snowden that the Paris attacks resulted, in part, from “too much data.”
Snowden recently claimed that the existing surveillance programs aren’t working because analysts are over-burdened with data:
Edward Snowden is pointing to the recent terrorist attacks in France as evidence that government mass-surveillance programs don’t work because they are “burying people under too much data.”
“When we look at the Paris attacks specifically, we see that France passed one of the most intrusive, expansive surveillance laws in all of Europe last year, and it didn’t stop the attack,” the fugitive leaker said in an interview with NOS, a Dutch news organization, released Wednesday. “And this is consistent with what we’ve seen in every country.”
“When you look at the United States, the Patriot Act, the mass surveillance that’s been debated and criticized since 2013, the White House did two independent investigations into its effectiveness and found that despite monitoring the phone calls for everyone in the United States every time they pick up the phone, it hadn’t stopped a single attack,” Snowden said in his NOS interview.
“Individuals in the intelligence community are very focused on their targets and I think one of the things that Edward Snowden misses is that there is an opportunity to focus on individuals, like the individuals that were basically accused of the attacks in Paris earlier this month,” he said.
According to Rickard, it isn’t that ‘too much data’ prevented the watchers from catching the accused terrorists, but rather that they turned a blind eye to let things play out.
In other words, it is quite clear that the attacks were in the interests of the system for propaganda purposes, and to pursue the surveillance and security agenda.
As Press TV noted, the same (and worse) has happened in other high profile terror cases, including the very damning case of the “Underwear Bomber”:
He mentioned the case of Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the so-called underwear bomber, who was convicted of attempting to blow up a Detroit-bound flight on the 2009 Christmas Day, using explosives hidden in his underwear.
Rickard said US intelligence knew of the plot but allowed the bomber to proceed with his plan.
“This was another example whereby the US and western intelligence had great amount of information about the movements and the whereabouts of Abdulmutallab and they even helped him get through the airport in Amsterdam on his way to the United States to do the underwear bombing,” he said.
“So I think we are seeing a façade of actual truth in the matter of this attack whereby I think there may be an opportunity to pull back the curtains and see that the intelligence community knew a lot more about these guys.”
The truth, quite simply, has nothing to do with what was reported to the public. The truth, if you let it settle in, should be quite unnerving – because of what it reveals about those in power, and the lengths they will go to in order to ‘keep us safe and secure’ – under a police state with close monitoring and sharply curtailed liberties. 9/11 all over again.
Why would the government want to punish people that are just trying to work hard, become more self-sufficient and take care of their families? There are approximately 3 million preppers in the United States today, and often they appear to be singled out for punishment by bureaucratic control freaks that are horrified at the thought that there are families out there that actually want to try to become less dependent on the system. So if you use alternative methods to heat your home, or if you are not connected to the utility grid, or if you collect rainwater on your property, or if you believe that parents should have the ultimate say when it comes to health decisions for their children, you could become a target for overzealous government enforcers. Once upon a time, America was the land of the free and the home of the brave, but now we are being transformed into a socialist police state where control freak bureaucrats use millions of laws, rules and regulations to crack down on anyone that dares to think for themselves.
For example, people have been burning wood to heat their homes since this country began. And this is still very common in rural areas. But the Obama administration does not like this at all. The Obama bureaucrats at the EPA fear that our little wood stoves may be contributing to “global warming”, so they have outlawed the production and sale of 80 percent of the wood stoves that are currently in use. The following comes from a recent Forbes article…
It seems that even wood isn’t green or renewable enough anymore. The EPA has recently banned the production and sale of 80 percent of America’s current wood-burning stoves, the oldest heating method known to mankind and mainstay of rural homes and many of our nation’s poorest residents. The agency’s stringent one-size-fits-all rules apply equally to heavily air-polluted cities and far cleaner plus typically colder off-grid wilderness areas such as large regions of Alaska and the American West.
While EPA’s most recent regulations aren’t altogether new, their impacts will nonetheless be severe. Whereas restrictions had previously banned wood-burning stoves that didn’t limit fine airborne particulate emissions to 15 micrograms per cubic meter of air, the change will impose a maximum 12 microgram limit. To put this amount in context, EPA estimates that secondhand tobacco smoke in a closed car can expose a person to 3,000-4,000 micrograms of particulates per cubic meter.
Most wood stoves that warm cabin and home residents from coast-to-coast can’t meet that standard. Older stoves that don’t cannot be traded in for updated types, but instead must be rendered inoperable, destroyed, or recycled as scrap metal.
Does that make you angry?
There are other preppers that try to use very “clean” methods to power their homes, but that is still not good enough for some government control freaks.
For example, one prepper down in south Florida that had gone “off the grid” was recently ordered by a court to connect back to the grid or face eviction from his home. The following is an excerpt from a recent article by Guiles Hendrik…
Think you are still free to make choices in your life? Do you think the government will allow you to live independent of their utility monopolies? If you think so, try opting for renewable non-grid tied power and utilize environmentally friendly composting toilets and your own self-sufficient water supply. Today, those life choices could land you in jail if you live in South Florida. Take the case of Robin Speronis.
Robin Speronis has lived off the grid, independent of the city’s water and electric system. A Florida court ruled this off-the-grid living illegal last week and has given Robin until March to connect her home to a municipal water line or face possible eviction. Further, officials in the city of Cape Coral have justified this by deeming Robin’s home “unsanitary,” citing the International Property Maintenance Code. First of all, since when did we begin to locally recognize “international codes?” Where in the US Constitution does it provide for international jurisdiction over local codes? Ironically, this “international” code mandates that homes be connected to an electricity grid and a running water source, even though most of the world lives without reliable electricity and municipal water and sewer. Further, the code is outdated and obsolete because it was written without consideration to both old and new technologies that relegate the need for grid tied power and municipal water as unnecessary and expensive; especially, in locations where it simply isn’t feasible to have grid tied utilities. Nonetheless, Speronis’ home does in fact have power and water through far cheaper and more environmentally friendly means — solar panels and rainwater, but that reality is ignored by the local government.
Incredibly, most Americans still seem to believe that we live in a “free country”. But we don’t. Our lives are very tightly constrained by literally millions of laws, rules and regulations, and more are being added every single day.
Even some of our most basic fundamental rights have been seriously eroded. One of these is the right to make basic health decisions for our own children. In New York state, children that have not received all of the designated vaccines can now be banned from attending public school, and this requirement was recently upheld by a federal appeals court…
New York state’s requirement that children be vaccinated before attending public school does not violate their constitutional rights, a federal appeals court in Manhattan said on Wednesday.
In affirming the requirement’s constitutionality, a three-judge panel of the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals also upheld a previous ruling by a federal judge that students exempted from the requirement for religious reasons can be barred from school when another child has a disease preventable by a vaccine.
The decision was the latest to go against three parents from New York City who say their religious rights were violated when their children were kept out of school as a result of the immunization policies. The parents’ lawyer, Patricia Finn, said her clients planned to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.
So what are we free to do without government interference these days?
In fact, in some states we can’t even sit on our own land and collect the rain as it falls from the sky for our own personal use.
If you do this in the state of Oregon, for example, you could go to prison…
Gary Harrington, the Oregon man convicted of collecting rainwater and snow runoff on his rural property surrendered Wednesday morning to begin serving his 30-day, jail sentence in Medford, Ore.
“I’m sacrificing my liberty so we can stand up as a country and stand for our liberty,” Harrington told a small crowd of people gathered outside of the Jackson County (Ore.) Jail.
Several people held signs that showed support for Harrington as he was taken inside the jail.
And of course these are just a few examples. Almost every single day there are more stories in the news about government bureaucrats cracking down on preppers. They almost seem to relish the opportunity to go after the “non-conformists”.
But the good news is that the number of Americans that are seeking to become less dependent on the system just continues to grow.
So what about you?
Are you a prepper?
My friend Daisy Luther recently wrote a piece entitled “45 MORE Signs That You Might Be One of Those Crazy Preppers“. The following are some of the most interesting “signs” from her list…
*You spend your days off digging an underground bunker in your backyard.
*Your family doesn’t dare take something from the food stockpile without marking it off the list.
*Your kids know how to don a gas mask in 30 seconds.
*Everyone in your survival group carries the same firearm so that ammo is standardized.
*Your family is no longer surprised when you announce, “Hey, we’re going to learn how to make (insert anything here)!”
*You have long since accepted the idea that if you’re not on someone’s list, you’re probably not doing it right.
*You don’t just rotate food, you rotate ammo.
*Moving to a new house is no longer “moving”, but “strategic relocation”.
*Your kids think it’s a fun game to see who can find the most potential weapons in a room.
*Your EDC includes a knife, firearm w/extra mag, flashlight, mylar blanket, Chapstick, and an ounce of silver — and that’s just for when you’re walking the dog.
*One criterion for your new winter coat is that it fits over your body armor.
You can read her entire article right here.
America was built by people that loved their families, worked hard and were self-sufficient.
Now our government is specifically targeting those kinds of people.
What in the world is happening to us?
Michael T. Snyder is a graduate of the McIntire School of Commerce at the University of Virginia and has a law degree and an LLM from the University of Florida Law School. He is an attorney that has worked for some of the largest and most prominent law firms in Washington D.C. and who now spends his time researching and writing and trying to wake the American people up. You can follow his work on The Economic Collapse blog, End of the American Dream and The Truth Wins. His new novel entitled “The Beginning Of The End” is now available on Amazon.com.