Police Will Not Protect You

CAUTION: Extreme Violence

Also see:

Police Have No Duty to Protect You


Tweet

Explosion On Moon Is Largest Ever Seen

Tweet

Cops Run Over, Kill Man for Seat Belt Violation

We'z gonna safety you to death!


I found this article at CopBlock.com

It was originally posted by Eric Peters

Not “buckling up for safety” can get you killed all right – by a cop.

That’s what happened to Deland, Florida resident Marlon Brown about a week ago. Brown was killed – run over – by Deland Police Officer James Harris, who pursued him with his squad car after Brown tried to run away on foot after being stopped over a seatbelt violation (see here).

Brown, a popular neighborhood barber, hadn’t done anything to anyone. His “crime” was to have asserted self-ownership, which in a slave society is the gravest offense. He probably thought to himself – I am a grown man. No one has any more right to demand I wear a seatbelt than they have a right to insist I eat my veggies or wear a sweater because it’s cold out. Whether eating veggies or wearing a sweater on a cold day – or “buckling up for safety” – is a good idea or a bad idea is  no one else’s business. Certainly not a cop’s. Aren’t cops supposed to fight crime? When did the job of a cop become parenting or life-coaching at gunpoint? Who the hell are these people to point guns at me over my decision to not “buckle up”?

Brown likely had such thoughts as he saw the wig-wag lights of Officer Harris in his rear view. Then, he probably got mad. I know I would have. You are driving along, minding your business, causing no harm to anyone. Then you glance up and see the bright lights – and the buzz-cut head – of Officer Unfriendly. This costumed menace is about to threaten you with violence and – at minimum – shove a piece of paper in your face that will demand what amounts to a ransom payment, or else (“else” being jail).

And so, Brown attempted to flee. It ended up costing him his life.

Officer safety was never at issue. Brown merely tried to get away from an obnoxious costumed thug who had no business bothering him in the first place. But that was sufficient to justify summary execution by motor vehicle.

It is not an isolated happenstance anymore. Hardly a week goes by without some godawful report of a citizen being killed by cops over absolutely nothing. A murder – and that’s exactly what this was – prefaced by some petty affront to the authority of someone in a state-issued costume. Talk back, dare to question – and the Tazers come out. Attempt to ward off the blows – and you will hear “Stop Resisting!” as the blows continue to rain down. They may or may not stop at merely a beating, or a kicked-in skull.

Marlon Brown learned just how far it can go. A witness to the event, Sabrina Waldron, stated, “After the car hit Marlon and landed on him the back end of it was up in the air.” Thus ended Brown’s life.

Was it worth it? Was it right? A man is dead – for no reason. Or rather, for a very bad reason.

In a sane society, Officer Harris would have had no legal pretext for bothering Marlon Brown. He may have looked askance at him for electing to not wear his seat belt – just as I may look askance at a grossly obese person ordering a double cheeseburger and 64 ounce Coke – but insofar as Officer Harris’ legal authority was concerned, he (in a sane society) would be powerless to intervene. That’s how it ought to be. For the same reason, most of us (dear god, let us hope) do not want costumed men with guns rousting us out of bed to go for morning jogs or to supervise our dinner menus, threatening us with nightsticks and Tazers and guns if we don’t abide by their “recommendations.”

That is where we are headed if people do not come to their senses, and learn to discipline their inner busybody – if only for their own sake. Because most definitely, what goes around will come around. You may find it appalling that some people choose to go unbuckled. Resist the desire to insist they do so. Because if you do insist, you’ve just given license to the inner busybodies of all those people out there – among whom, no doubt, there will be busybodies who just can’t abide something about the way you live your life, whether it be some “risky” hobby, or some “unhealthy” habit. No small corner of what used to be your life will be left to you. You will be chained to a collective and compelled to Submit & Obey.

The antidote to this horror is self-ownership. You own you. I own me. Neither of us has any claim on the other that’s enforceable at gunpoint. Feel free to suggest or to recommend, but when it comes to the use of force, the one and only legitimate justification is self-defense. Otherwise, leave me alone – and I will leave you alone.

If that had been the law in Deland, Florida, Marlon Brown would still be alive.

And James Harris would not be a murderer.

Read the original post here.

Tweet

Do These Images Reveal The Real Boston Bombers?

While the FBI claims to have video of the Tsarnev brothers actually placing the bombs, no such video has yet been made public. From the start, the media has tried to convince us that just because the brothers were caught on a store surveillance camera wearing backpacks, that they must be the bombers. Of course, that means we must also ignore the dozens of other people caught on camera that day wearing backpacks and carrying bags.

People like this guy, who we see here carrying a bag very similar to one that we later saw exploded.  

(There was also an image of him not carrying the bag later, as if he had left it somewhere. But it appears that image has now been scrubbed from the internet. If anyone has a copy, please email me or drop it in a comment in the DISQUS box.)

Some reports indicate that this guy was cleared by the FBI after questioning.

From these images, we can clearly see what is believed to be one of the two bombs. Although the focus has been on backpacks all along, this looks more like a bag of some sort, than a regular backpack.

So do we have any images of the suspected brothers near there, or better yet, actually placing that bag? No. What we have are images of two women placing the bag there, in two parts, while an older man watches from behind.

While these images too might just be "coincidence" it is far more compelling evidence than seeing the suspect brothers simply walking around wearing backpacks. Before they were singled out, dozens, if not hundreds of people carrying bags were scrutinized in images plastered up all over the internet.

It is also interesting to note, that within minutes of the bombing, the FBI were destroying evidence.

Boston Bombing Witness Says FBI Deleted His Crime Scene Photos




Tweet

Deer Jumps Through Bus Windshield

This Pennsylvania bus driver had only one passenger as he was driving down the road, when suddenly as second jumped on board... through the windshield.



Tweet

'Space Oddity' by ISS Commander Chris Hadfield

Tweet

Rise of American Military Dictatorship as Pentagon Updates Civil Regulations

This compilation originally presented by November Yankee


Pentagon Unilaterally Grants Itself Authority Over ‘Civil Disturbances’

The manhunt for the Boston Marathon bombing suspects offered the nation a window into the stunning military-style capabilities of our local law enforcement agencies. For the past 30 years, police departments throughout the United States have benefitted from the government’s largesse in the form of military weaponry and training, incentives offered in the ongoing “War on Drugs.” For the average citizen watching events such as the intense pursuit of the Tsarnaev brothers on television, it would be difficult to discern between fully outfitted police SWAT teams and the military.

The North Hollywood Shootout of 1997 is often touted by police as the reason behind the militarization of their forces. In that incident police engaged two bank robbers who were heavily armed with military-grade machine guns, and armored from head to toe in military-grade bullet-resistant Kevlar gear. The robbers were eventually killed, and though several officers were injured, there were no other deaths stemming from that incident. Nonetheless, this became a rallying point to arm not only SWAT teams with military-grade weaponry, but regular patrol officers as well.

The militarization of police has not been limited to pistols and rifles though. Some of this has been more subtle and psychological, such as new uniforms. Police have traditionally worn a blue uniform, usually with a tie, shoes shined, and carried themselves with a respectable and formal appearance. Today that trend has been broken by police wearing military-style tactical apparel, in a more intimidating black color rather than the professional blues. While one may not see this shift in uniform styling as of any concern, it actually goes to show the shift in the mindset of police, from public servant, to militant occupier. A shift where now the police no longer see a public to be served, but rather a public that is to be controlled as a potential enemy at any given moment.

This mindset of an undeclared guerrilla war being played out on the streets of America has led to inordinate amounts of spending by police departments on military-grade hardware. Particularly in the post-9/11 era, where the public are duped out of their freedoms and vast amounts of tax dollars under the guise of "protecting the homeland" from Muslim fanatics. This is despite the fact that an American citizen is 8 times more likely to be killed by a police officer than a terrorist.

In just this one instance, as an example, a man armed only with a golf-club was shot dead by police executing a search warrant targeting a woman they knew had already moved out of the home. They went ahead with the no-knock raid anyway, and shot this man dead in the process.

Caution, graphic video: Dead Bang: Man Shot Dead By Home Invaders (VIDEO)

While some may see things like this as isolated incidents, it's important to keep in mind that incidents like this will happen more and more frequently as police try to justify their own budgets for increased spending on everything from new cruisers every year to military-grade tanks and armored vehicles.

Police storm neighborhood with snipers and a tank to evict old lady

This report highlights how frequently military-grade force is applied for mundane reasons and run-of-the-mill police work.

Disturbing Results of SWAT Transparency Bill

Of course, we don't just have our local police departments in on the game any more either. Since 9/11, we now have the Department of Homeland Security, reminiscent of the Gestapo national police force in Nazi Germany. DHS are both a domestic spying apparatus, and a showcase for military hardware in civilian dress.

Why are IED/Mine Resistant Vehicles Being Deployed Within U.S.?

But it's not just new agencies, or regular police departments that are getting paramilitary upgrades either.

Why does the Department of Education need a SWAT team?

So what does all of this add up to?

Firing With Intent: Are American Cops Out of Control

In Boston, we saw our first widely publicized instance of martial law here in the United States. Not only were the police and Federal agents fully-equipped with heavy military-grade equipment, but they were acting in direct violation of the 4th Amendment.

Families Ripped From Homes By Police In Watertown

Some Americans were utterly shocked by this vulgar display of paramilitary might being brought to bear on an American town, utterly destroying the very foundations of what it means to be an American in the first place. Sadly enough though, there were so many other Americans that cheered the triumph of martial law, even in its failure to locate the suspect whom they claimed was the reason for this "Red Dawn" reminiscent invasion. Thanks to rigorous propaganda and the lobotomy of social consciousness, all too many Americans would echo this sentiment...

'If You're Not a Terrorist...Prove It' Says NYPD's Top Sergeant

And while some of us are still awake enough to realize the tyranny of all this, even those of us who try to stay aware, wind up missing key events in the march toward complete and utter totalitarianism. Did you know that if you are withing 100 miles of a United States border, you are in a zone where Constitutional rights have already been suspended?

America's Own Iron Curtain: DHS Suspends Constitution at Borders

The lines blurred even further Monday as a new dynamic was introduced to the militarization of domestic law enforcement. By making a few subtle changes to a regulation in the U.S. Code titled “Defense Support of Civilian Law Enforcement Agencies” the military has quietly granted itself the ability to police the streets without obtaining prior local or state consent, upending a precedent that has been in place for more than two centuries.

The most objectionable aspect of the regulatory change is the inclusion of vague language that permits military intervention in the event of “civil disturbances.” According to the rule:

Federal military commanders have the authority, in extraordinary emergency circumstances where prior authorization by the President is impossible and duly constituted local authorities are unable to control the situation, to engage temporarily in activities that are necessary to quell large-scale, unexpected civil disturbances.

Bruce Afran, a civil liberties attorney and constitutional law professor at Rutgers University, calls the rule, “a wanton power grab by the military,” and says, “It’s quite shocking actually because it violates the long-standing presumption that the military is under civilian control.”

A defense official who declined to be named takes a different view of the rule, claiming, “The authorization has been around over 100 years; it’s not a new authority. It’s been there but it hasn’t been exercised. This is a carryover of domestic policy.” Moreover, he insists the Pentagon doesn’t “want to get involved in civilian law enforcement. It’s one of those red lines that the military hasn’t signed up for.” Nevertheless, he says, “every person in the military swears an oath of allegiance to the Constitution of the United States to defend that Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic.”

Sadly enough, the "presumption" of the constitutional law professor is false, and the unnamed defense official is correct. The military is not under civilian control, and has not been for roughly 150 years. Specifically, the authorization is called...

General Orders No. 100: The Lieber Code

...which reads in part...

“1. A place, district, or country occupied by an enemy stands, in consequence of the occupation, under the martial law of the invading or occupying army, whether any proclamation declaring martial law, or any public warning to the inhabitants, has been issued or not. Martial law is the immediate and direct effect and consequence of occupation or conquest.

The presence of a hostile army proclaims its martial law.

2. Martial law does not cease during the hostile occupation, except by special proclamation, ordered by the commander-in-chief, or by special mention in the treaty of peace concluding the war, when the occupation of a place or territory continues beyond the conclusion of peace as one of the conditions of the same.

3. Martial law in a hostile country consists in the suspension by the occupying military authority of the criminal and civil law, and of the domestic administration and government in the occupied place or territory, and in the substitution of military rule and force for the same, as well as in the dictation of general laws, as far as military necessity requires this suspension, substitution, or dictation.

The commander of the forces may proclaim that the administration of all civil and penal law shall continue either wholly or in part, as in times of peace, unless otherwise ordered by the military authority.”

And the military is already prepared to start rounding up American citizens.

New Military Transport Raises Concerns

The militarization of our local police forces is not simply a by-product of the times we live in. When you understand the real laws, when you understand history, you see that the local police are acting under the authority of the military, as a proxy.

Through revisionist history taught to us in classrooms and school books, the Civil War has been idealized as some great volcanic movement of freedom against racial oppressors. Even though it took another century after that for black folk to actually get civil rights, we are taught that the Civil War was all about liberating the peoples of Africa here in America.

They say that history is written by the victor, and the Civil War is no exception. The Civil War had nothing to do with freeing the slaves. The Emancipation Proclamation was a tactic of economic warfare against the rebellious Confederacy, it had nothing to do with equality for blacks.

"I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in anyway the social and political equality of the white and black races - that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality." -Abraham Lincoln, 1858

"My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it." -Abraham Lincoln, 1862

So what was the Civil War really about then? The same thing that most rebellions are born of. A rejection of tyranny and oppression. In that instance, it was a confederation of states who rejected Federal authority over the sovereignty of independent states.

And from those days to this, the United States has existed, not as a Constitutional Republic, but under a declared state of martial law.

U.S. Federal Authority Is Martial Law



The preceding compilation contains excerpts from an article published at Before It's News. Please visit that link for their full article. Excerpts are highlighted in gray. Some highlighted text reinforced by November Yankee

Military Troops Patrol Grand Central Terminal After 9/11

Tweet

Pressure-Cooker Bomb In Michigan Reported

This is a story that highlights both police-state hysteria scare-tactics as well as American xenophobia.

Talal al Rouki likes to cook, and share with his friends. Being generous and sharing, especially with food, is a common theme for people of the Muslim faith. I can attest to this personally. Though I am not a Muslim myself, I have often been invited to partake of many wonderful and exotic west-Asian meals among friends who follow the tenets of Islam. This generosity of sustenance is much the same as I have experienced with friends of Southern tradition here in the ol' U.S.

Mr. al Rouki had prepared a traditional Saudi Arabian rice dish called kabsah, and carried it to a friend's house in the pressure cooker the dish had been prepared in.

Ah yes, a pressure cooker. Forever synonymous now with the Boston bombing rather than the millions of wonderful dishes that can be prepared in one.

Seeing this foreign-looking person carrying a "bullet-colored" cooking device was enough to trigger the instincts of neighbors into actions after they witnessed the suspicious transport of rice, or a "bomb" as they called it. The FBI was called and swiftly, two days later, armed agents swarmed the apartment block.

The agents carried no warrant, but pressed the "nervous" student to enter his home and to answer questions. He obliged them, answered a number of personal questions, and showed the officials the suspicious pressure-cooker.

When agents were unable to piece together enough evidence to make an arrest, they warned the young student, "You need to be more careful moving around with such things, Sir."

This story has also been reported at:

Mail Online

InfoWars.com



Tweet