[Vanilla Vice is the “Con Game"] Lindsay Graham is Correct. Contemptuous Kavanaugh ‘is No Cosby.’ In a White Over Black System Nobody is Where They Should Be. Kavanaugh Should Be Taking Orders at KFC

Vanilla Vice is the “Con Game"

Sen: Lindsey Graham: Brett Kavanaugh "not a Bill Cosby."

Dr. Blynd explains, “Vanilla Vice” is “Congress assembled,” “the Oligarchy and Western Civilization” and [MORE].

Dr. Frances Cress Welsing described the system of racism/white supremacy with the diagram above. Neely Fuller explained “If you are already functioning from a conclusion, you will never arrive to truth -- never!” With regard to the context of racism white supremacy he also said ‘no people are the quality of people that any people should be.’

And in the context of all things including said system Bhagwan said the following:

Once a jaina monk came to see me. He asked, "Is hell real? Is there really a hell?" Instead of answering him, I asked him, "And where do you think you are living?" Man lives in hell, because man is upside down. You need not go to some stupid yoga teacher to learn the headstand posture, because you are already doing it. Everything is in the wrong order. For centuries you have been messed up; a chaos has been created in you instead of a cosmos. You are just a kind of madness. Whatever you think is normal is not normal at all. It appears normal, because you have lived with these people from your very childhood and you have started thinking that these are the only people, so they must be normal.

It is as if one was born in a madhouse and from the very beginning was acquainted only with mad people; he will think them normal. In fact, if he ever comes across somebody who is sane, he will be very puzzled, he will not be able to believe his own eyes. He will think this man has gone crazy.

Man is a chaos. Let this idea sink deep into your heart, because only then the desire to create a cosmos out of this chaos arises. The moment you realize that you are standing on your head, a great moment has arrived. Now you cannot go on standing on your head any more: you have to do something, it is inevitable. You have to act -- and that very act becomes religion.

Religion is against society, because society lives on this so-called normal madness of people. Society wants people to be abnormal; only then can they be exploited, only then can they be reduced into machines, only then can they be reduced to slaves -- and happily, and without any revolt.

For thousands of years, man has lived in an imprisoned state. Those prisons have been given beautiful names: you call them churches, religions, ideologies. Somebody lives in a Catholic prison and somebody lives in a communist prison, and both go on bragging about their prison, that their prison is far better. But any person who lives through some ideology is a prisoner, because every ideology narrows down your consciousness, becomes chains on your being. Anybody who belongs to any crowd out of fear, out of conditioning, out of a kind of hypnosis, is not truly a man, is not yet born. The opportunity has been given to him, but he is wasting it.
You have been taught values which are not really values; you have been taught things which are basically poisonous. For example, you have been told not to love yourself, and you have been told so many times that it looks like a simple fact, truth. But a man who is incapable of loving himself will be incapable of loving anybody else. The man who cannot love himself cannot love at all.

You have been told to be altruistic and never selfish. And it looks so beautiful -- but it only looks beautiful; it is destroying your very roots. Only a really selfish person can be altruistic, because one who is not rooted in his self, is not selfish, will not bother about anybody else. If he cannot care for himself, how can he care for anybody else? He is suicidal; naturally he will become murderous.

Your whole society up to now has been a society of murderers. A few people commit suicide; they become saints. A few more go on committing murder; they become great politicians, great leaders -- Genghis Khan, Nadir Shah, Tamerlane, Alexander, Napoleon, Adolf Hitler, Stalin, Mao. But both are neurotic, both are unhealthy.

You have to be taught new values. Atisha's sutras will help you immensely. He is really a revolutionary, a really religious man -- a man who knows, not through scriptures but by his own experience; a man who has looked deep into the misery of man, a man who is really so full of compassion that he wants to help, to be of some help to the suffering humanity. And the suffering humanity is not helped by creating more hospitals or by making more people educated. The suffering humanity can be helped only by giving it a new soul.

People like Mother Teresa of Calcutta are simply serving the status quo. That's why they are respected by the status quo. They are given gold medals, prizes, awards, and the society thinks Mother Teresa is the symbol of real saintlihoodness. It is not so; she is simply in the service of a rotten society. Of course the rotten society respects her. She is not a revolutionary, she is not a religious person.

And this is something to be understood: society respects only those saints who are not really sages but are agents -- agents who help the society to continue as it is, agents of the establishment.

Atisha is not for the establishment. He wants to create a new man, a new humanity, as always buddhas have dreamed about. Their dreams remain yet unfulfilled. [MORE]

Video of Testimony in 6th and 7th Days of Jason Van Dyke Murder Trial, White Chicago Cop who Killed Laquan McDonald

Cleveland to Pay Kenneth Smith's Family $3.7M: White Cop Pulled Black Man Out of Car, Ordered him to Kneel Down, Placed Gun On Back of his Head & Fired - Still on Force, Called Hero by Prosecutor

From [HERE] The city of Cleveland agreed on Tuesday to pay the family of a Black man who was shot and killed by a white off-duty police officer in 2012 the sum of $3.7 million as part of a wrongful-death lawsuit.

The lawsuit, originally filed in 2013, said that Cleveland police officer Roger Jones used "excessive and unreasonable force" when he shot 20-year-old Kenneth C. Smith in the head during an incident on East 9th Street and Prospect Avenue on March 10, 2012.

Smith's family was later awarded $5.5 million by a jury, but the amount was later lowered to $4 million after the city appealed the decision. 

On Tuesday, the city agreed to the final amount of $3.7 million.

In January a federal appeals court panel on Friday upheld the verdict awarding $4 million. Three judges at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit in Cincinnati affirmed a jury's 2015 finding that Cleveland police officer Roger Jones used excessive force and was civilly liable for the death of 20-year-old Kenny Smith. 

Jones shot Smith in the back of the head at East 9th Street and Prospect Avenue in March 2012. Police stopped the car because they believed the driver, Devonta Hill, had just fired into a crowd outside Wilbert's Food & Music in downtown Cleveland.

Then-Prosecutor Timothy J. McGinty, [racist suspect in photo] initially cleared Jones of wrongdoing and wrote in an April 2014 letter that the officer "correctly and heroically took action to protect the safety of the citizens of Cleveland." He lost his 2016 re-election bid.

The officer said Smith refused an order to get out of the car, and resisted when Jones tried to pull Smith out of the car, according to a recitation of the facts included in the appellate court’s opinion in January.

Jones said Smith reached for a gun in the center console, and Jones fired a single shot, the officer said. However, the jury did not find the officer to be credible and his testimony was directly contradicted by physical evidence and witness testimony.

Two eyewitnesses from a different car, Kayla Hodge and Alexis McCray, testified at civil trial that Jones pulled Smith out of the car and ordered him to kneel on the pavement, according to the appellate court’s opinion.

As Smith complied, Jones placed his semi-automatic handgun onto the back of Smith's head and fired a single shot, the witnesses testified.

Investigators found none of Smith's blood in the car. They did find the expelled bullet cartridge from Jones' gun in a puddle of Smith's blood outside the car, according to the opinion.

The 20-year-old man took a few steps away from the car, collapsed and “lay gurgling for breath for many minutes before an ambulance was called,” according to the complaint. [MORE]

McGinty, as well as Cleveland police detectives, concluded that Jones fired as Smith lunged for a gun on the car's center console. But Smith's family, which sued in 2013, asserted at the civil trial that Smith was outside of the car -- and away from the gun -- when Jones shot him. 

However, jurors did not find police testimony to be credible.

After the federal jury in September 2015 found that Jones was liable for Smith's death. It awarded Smith's family $5.5 million, and caused the prosecutor's office to ask the sheriff's department to re-investigate.

The three-judge panel unanimously rejected all of the city's arguments -- including the city's contention that the shooting was objectively reasonable because Smith's elbow was next to a gun found in the car.

"A police officer cannot shoot a person simply because the person is near a gun," the opinion, authored by Circuit Judge Raymond Kethledge, said.

Jones is still on the city's police force and is assigned to the Third District's community services unit, department spokeswoman Sgt. Jennifer Ciaccia said. [MORE]

Lawyers representing Smith's family, Terry Gilbert and Jacqueline Greene, celebrated the panel's opinion in January as a moment of accountability in the national conversation on police shootings.

"This was a horrific and heartbreaking shooting," Greene said in a news release. "We hope the outcome of Kenny's case sends a message that unjustified police shootings will not be tolerated."

Texas AG Joins Case to Uphold Law Coercing Schoolchildren to Pledge Allegiance to Government or Face Expulsion - Suit Brought by Parents of Black Teenage Girl Inspired by NFL Protests

teaching blind obedience in “Public Fool System - a place where children are having unprotected education. 2) a syndromatic exercise in conformity and blind obedience to so-called "authority" (disguised repression). 3) systematic planned violence meted out on children and young adults—held hostage and hostile—daily, hourly, quarantined from the natural rhythm of things in life through Pavlovian bells and shrink-wrapped prefabricated and curriculum and distorted history. 4) a training boot camp for life-long slavery and indentured servitude to gangbankers and the Corporate State in a society created and based in violence, governed by fear, propaganda, psychogenic money and power.” - Dr. Blynd.

From [HERE] Racist suspect Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton is defending a state law that requires schoolchildren to say the Pledge of Allegiance by joining a lawsuit that could determine the legality of similar mandates nationwide.

On Tuesday, Paxton intervened in a lawsuit that was filed against the Cypress Fairbanks school district last October. Kizzy Landry sued the district and several officials after a principal kicked her daughter, India, out of school for sitting during the Pledge. 

Landry supported her child's decision to sit. And while Texas allows parents to sign a waiver letting their child opt out of saying the Pledge, Landry contends that the law requiring kids to say it in the first place violates their free speech rights. Paxton disagreed, arguing: "School children cannot unilaterally refuse to participate in the pledge."

"Requiring the pledge to be recited at the start of every school day has the laudable result of fostering respect for our flag and a patriotic love of our country," Paxton said in a prepared statement. "This case is about providing for the saying of the pledge of allegiance while respecting the parental right to direct the education of children."

The case is set for trial April 15. Experts said its outcome could have ripple effects nationwide.

"We've only ever seen one case litigated involving the mandate to say the Pledge in modern history," Frank LoMonte, one of the nation's foremost experts on free speech and student rights, said in an interview. "If this one were to go up [to the U.S. Supreme Court], it would be quite influential, not just in Texas but across the country as the first of its kind."

According to FUNKTIONARY the Pledge of Allegiance - (to the Federal Flag)—did not exist until 1892. The pledge of allegiance was written by a flag manufacturer and merchant, Francis Bellamy, ostensibly for a boy's magazine entitled "'The Youth's Companion," as part of a promotion (to sell his wares) celebrating the fictitious Pirate's Day (Columbus Day). Next time someone wants you to pledge allegiance to the flag, better think about the God-given rights you are waiving instead of watching the flag waving. (See: National Flag, Citizen of the United States. Rights, Congress, Slavery, US. Citizen, Allegiance & Citizens)

The case

India said that by age 17, she had refused to stand for the Pledge around 200 times. Then she switched schools to Windfern School of Choice in Houston, where the staff began to discipline her for sitting. When she refused to stand for the Pledge while in the principal's office, she was kicked out of school.

"This is not the NFL," a school secretary told India, according to the lawsuit. "Principal [Martha] Strother suggested that, instead of sitting, India could write about justice and African Americans being killed."

For four days, the Landrys were told that India, who is black, couldn't come back to school until she agreed to stand for the Pledge. They refused and instead went on television to criticize the school's statements. The next day, the principal reversed her decision and let India return.

But her mother said her daughter's grades suffered. India, now 18, did not graduate. It's unclear whether Kizzy Landry signed a waiver to let India opt out of the Pledge.

She was inspired by NFL players taking a knee during the national anthem to protest the killings of unarmed black men, women and children by police.

“I felt the flag doesn’t represent what it stands for, liberty and justice for all and I don’t feel what is going on in the country, so it was my choice to remain seated, silently,” Landry told the Chronicle. “It was a silent protest.” [MORE]

In July, a federal judge refused to throw out the case, saying that India could proceed with First Amendment free speech and 14th Amendment due process and equal protection claims against the district and its leaders. 

The attorney general has the right to intervene in cases when the constitutionality of a state law is questioned. On Tuesday, Paxton filed a motion to do so.

The district, in responding to a request for comment, reiterated that state law requires students to stand for the Pledge unless their parents sign a waiver.

The Landrys' attorney, Randall Kallinen, criticized Paxton's statements as "very political." The American Civil Liberties Union of Texas agreed. 

"Once again, it appears that Ken Paxton is using his authority to foster division within our state through political posturing," said Andre Segura, legal director for the ACLU of Texas. "Educators and lawmakers alike should take this as an opportunity to create a discourse on civic engagement, rather than to punish students."

The precedent

Paxton argues that the Supreme Court has upheld a parent or guardian's "fundamental interest in guiding the education and upbringing of their children. That interest rightfully includes determining whether their children should participate in the time-honored tradition of reciting the Pledge of Allegiance to the United States flag."

LoMonte, the free speech and student rights expert, disagreed, citing other cases. 

In 1943, the Supreme Court ruled that forcing schoolchildren to salute the flag violated their First Amendment right to free speech. Then, in 1969, the court ruled that school officials can suppress students' free speech rights only if they can prove the conduct would "materially and substantially interfere" with the school's operation. 

States have tried to skirt these rulings by allowing parents to let their kids opt in or out of saying the Pledge. A Florida law similar to Texas' was upheld after its legality was challenged. But the Supreme Court didn't take up the case, meaning the precedent applies only in Alabama, Florida and Georgia.

LoMonte said punishing a child for refusing to stand flies in the face of the earlier Supreme Court decisions.

"A school cannot impose discipline on somebody who does nothing more than quietly sit down," he said. "The issue of the parental waiver certainly muddies the law, as there is definitely some strain of legal authority that says parents have a constitutional right to decide how their kids are raised."

LoMonte said the case could imperil compulsory Pledge laws across the country if it ends up in the Supreme Court, a process that could take years.

 Government is a coercive institution. Undeceiver Larken Rose explains the following;

“The purported purpose of schools is to teach reading, writing, mathematics, and other academic fields of thought. But the message that institutions of “education” actually teach, far more effectively than any useful knowledge or skills, is the idea that subservience and blind obedience to “authority” are virtues. Simply consider the environment in which the majority of people spend most of their formative years. Year after year, students live in a world in which:

• They receive approval, praise and reward for being where “authority” tells them to be, when “authority” tells them to be there. They receive disapproval, reproach and punishment for being anywhere else. (This includes the fact that they are coerced into being in school to begin with.)

• They receive approval, praise and reward for doing what “authority” tells them to do. They receive disapproval, reproach and punishment for doing anything else, or for failing to do what “authority” tells them to do.

• They receive approval, praise and reward for speaking when and how “authority” tells them to speak., and receive disapproval, reproach and punishment for speaking at any other time, in any other way, or about any subject other than what “authority” tells them to speak about, or for failing to speak when “authority” tells them to speak.

• They receive approval, praise and reward for repeating back whatever ideas the “authority” declares to be true and important, and receive disapproval, reproach and punishment for disagreeing, verbally or on a written test, with the opinions of those claiming to be “authority,” or for thinking or writing about subjects other than what “authority” tells them to think or write about.

• They receive approval, praise and reward for immediately telling “authority” about any problems or personal conflicts they encounter, and receive disapproval, reproach and punishment for trying to solve any problems or settle any disagreements on their own.

• They receive approval, praise and reward for complying with whatever rilles, however arbitrary, “authority” decides to impose upon them. They receive disapproval, reproach and punishment for disobeying any such rules. These rules can be about almost anything, including what clothes to wear, what hairstyles to have, what facial expression to have, how to sit in a chair, what to have on a desk, what direction to face, and what words to use.

• They receive approval, praise and reward for telling the “authority” when another student has disobeyed “the rules,” and receive disapproval, reproach and punishment for failing to do so.

The students clearly and immediately see that, in their world, there are two distinct classes of people, masters (”teachers”) and subjects (”students”), and that the rules of proper behavior are drastically different for the two groups. The masters constantly do things that they tell the subjects not to do: boss people around, control others via threats, take property from others, etc. This constant and obvious double standard teaches the subjects that there is a very different standard of morality for the masters than there is for the subjects. The subjects must do whatever the masters tell them to, and only what the masters tell them to, while the masters can do pretty much anything they want.

Not long ago, the masters would even routinely commit physical assault (i.e. “corporal punishment”) against subjects who did not quickly and unquestioningly do as they were told, while telling the subjects that it was completely unacceptable for them to ever use physical violence, even in self-defense, especially in self-defense against the masters. Thankfully, the use of regular, overt physical violence by “teachers” has become uncommon. However, though the force has become less obvious, the basic methods of authoritarian control and punishment remain.

In the classroom setting, the “authority” can change the rules at will, can punish the entire group for what one student does, and can question or search any student – or all students – at any time. The “authority” is never seen as having any obligation to justify or explain to the students the rules it makes, or anything else it does. And it is of no concern to “authority” whether a student has a good reason to think that us time would be better spent being somewhere else, doing something else, or thinking about something else. The “grades” the student receives, the way he is treated, the signals he is sent – written, verbal, and otherwise – all depend upon one factor: his ability and willingness to unquestioningly subvert his own desires, judgment and decisions to those of “authority.” If he does that, he is deemed “good.” If he does not, he is deemed “bad.”

This method of indoctrination was not accidental. Schooling in the United States, and in fact in much of the world, was deliberately modeled after the Prussian system of “education,” which was designed with the express purpose of training people to be obedient tools of the ruling class, easy to manage and quick to unthinkingly obey, especially for military purposes. As it was explained by Johann Fichte, one of the designers of the Prussian system, the goal of this method was to “fashion” the student in such a way that he “simply cannot will otherwise” than what those in “authority” want him to will. At the time, the system was openly admitted to be a means of psychologically enslaving the general populace to the will of the ruling class. And it continues to accomplish exactly that, all over the world, including in the United States.

The reason most people do whatever “authority” tells them to, regardless of whether the command is moral or rational, is because that is exactly what they were trained to do. Everything about authoritarian “schooling” (and authoritarian parenting), even the modern version that pretends to be caring and open-minded, continually hammers into the heads of the youngsters the notion that their success, their goodness, their very worth as human beings, is measured by how well they obey “authority.” [MORE]

Affirmative Action: Statists Face Reality of Non-Representative De-Mockery in Beggar’s Struggle to Stop GOP from Forcing Unwanted Judge Onto Public & Into his Entitled Seat on Supreme Court

Mob Rule aka De-mockery - a spectacle of the true nature of democracy. What each political party wants is not justice but its own idea of what is just (for themselves and their special interests)." 

FUNKTIONARY also defines:

Statism - the belief "citizens"' and "states" exist and the memetic thought patterns supporting such beliefs. 2) the religion of oppression and domination coupled with the science of exploitation and sociopathic control. 3) the opiate of the so-called Elites. 4) a philosophy that idealizes majority rule gang force (authority) over individual authenticity (autonomy). 5) servitude over liberty and statutes over humanity.

democracy - a commercial form of "government" (exploitation and theft via force, deception and involuntary participation) of the mob, by the mob, and/or the mob, i.e., Mob-Rule. 2) a guise rubber stamping of an alternative royalty into overruling power. 3) the worst possible form of government because the majority rules whether they be good, evil, or misled by a minority. 4) slavery of the people, by the people, for the people. 5) equality achieved through force. 6) a system where only the majority need to befooled. 7) advertised equality. 8) a parody of a free society that only ethical anarchism or voluntaryism can usher into existence.

Democracy has proved only that the best way to gain and sustain power over people is to assure the people that they are ruling themselves. Once they believe that lie, they make wonderfully submissive and self-maintained slaves. [MORE]

Larken Rose explains:

“In addition to the myth of “the consent of the governed,” other sayings and dogmatic rhetoric are often repeated, despite being completely inaccurate. For example, in the United States the people are taught – and faithfully repeat – such ideas as “We are the government” and “The government works for us” and “The government represents us,” Such aphorisms are blatantly and obviously untrue, despite the fact that they are constantly parroted by rulers and subjects alike.

One of the most bizarre and delusional (but very common) claims is that “We, the people, are the government.” Schoolchildren are taught to repeat this absurdity, even though everyone is fully aware that the politicians issue commands and demands, and everyone else either complies or is punished. In the United States there is a ruling class and a subject class, and the differences between them are many and obvious. One group commands, the other obeys. One group demands huge sums of money, the other group pays. One group tells the other group where they can live, where they can work, what they can eat, what they can drink, what they can drive, who they can work for, what work they can do, and so on. One group takes and spends trillions of dollars of what the other group earns. One group consists entirely of economic parasites, while the efforts of the other group produce all the wealth.

In this system, it is patently obvious who commands and who obeys. The people are not the “government,” by any stretch of the imagination, and it requires profound denial to believe otherwise. But other myths are also used to try to make that lie sound rational.

For example, it is also claimed that “the government works for us; it is our servant.” Again, such a statement does not even remotely match the obvious reality of the situation; it is little more than a cult mantra, a delusion intentionally programmed into the populace in order to twist their view of reality. And most people never even question it. Most never wonder, if “government” works for us, if it is our employee, why does it decide how much we pay it? Why does our “employee” decide what it will do for us? Why does our “employee” tell us how to live our lives? Why does our “employee” demand our obedience for whatever arbitrary commands it issues, sending armed enforcers after us if we disobey? It is impossible for “government” to ever be the servant, because of what “government” is, To put it in simple, personal terms, if someone can boss you around and take your money, he is not your servant; and if he cannot do those things, he is not “government.” However limited, “government” is the organization thought to have the right to forcibly control the behavior of its subjects via “laws,” rendering the popularly accepted rhetoric about “public servants” completely ridiculous. To imagine that a ruler could ever be the servant of those over whom he rules is patently absurd. Yet that impossibility is spouted as indisputable gospel in “civics” classes.

An even more prevalent lie, used to try to hide the master-slave relationship between “government” and the public, is the notion of “representative government.” The claim is that the people, by electing certain individuals into positions of power, are “choosing their leaders” and that those in office are merely representing the will of the people. Again, not only does this claim not at all match reality, but the underlying abstract theory is inherently flawed as well.

In the real world, so-called “representative governments” are constantly doing things their subjects do not want them to do: increasing “taxes,” engaging in warmongering, selling off power and influence to whoever gives them the most money, and so on. Every taxpayer can easily think of examples of things funded with his money) that he objects to, whether it be handouts to huge corporations, handouts to certain individuals, government actions that infringe on individual rights, or just the overall wasteful, corrupt, inefficient bureaucratic machine of “government.” There is no one who can honestly say that” government” does everything that he wants and nothing that he does not want.

Even in theory, the concept of “representative government” is inherently flawed, because “government” cannot possibly represent the people as a whole unless everyone wants exactly the same thing. Because different people want “government” to do different things, “government” will always be going against the will of at least some of the people.

Even if a “government” did exactly what a majority of its subjects wanted (which never actually happens), it would not be serving the people as a whole; it would be forcibly victimizing smaller groups on behalf of larger groups.

Furthermore, one who represents someone else cannot have more rights than the one he represents. To wit, if one person has no right to break into his neighbor’s house and steal his valuables, then he also has no right to designate a representative to do that for him, To represent someone is to act on his behalf, and a true representative can only do what the person he represents has the right to do. But in the case of “government,” the people whom the politicians claim to represent have no right to do anything that politicians do: impose “taxes,” enact “laws,” etc. Average citizens have no right to forcibly control the choices of their neighbors, tell them how to live their lives, and punish them if they disobey, So when a “government” does such things, it is not representing anyone or anything but itself.

Interestingly, even those who talk about “representative government” refuse to accept any personal responsibility for actions taken by those for whom they voted. If their candidate of choice enacts a harmful “law,” or raises “taxes,” or wages war, the voters never feel the same guilt or shame they would feel if they themselves had personally done such things, or had hired or instructed someone else to do such things. This fact demonstrates that even the most enthusiastic voters do not actually believe the rhetoric about “representative government,” and do not view politicians as their representatives. The terminology does not match reality, and the only purpose of the rhetoric is to obfuscate the fact that the relationship between every “government” and its subjects is the same as the relationship between a master and a slave. One master may whip his slaves less severely than another; one master may allow his slaves to keep more of what they produce; one master may take better care of his slaves – but none of that changes the basic, underlying nature of the master-slave relationship. The one with the right to rule is the master; the one with the obligation to obey is the slave. And that is true even when people choose to describe the situation using inaccurate rhetoric and deceptive euphemisms, such as “representative government,” “consent of the governed,” and “will of the people.”

The notion of “a government of the people, by the people, and for the people,” while it makes nice feel-good political rhetoric, is a logical impossibility. A ruling class cannot serve or represent those it rules any more than a slave owner can serve or represent his slaves. The only way he could do so is by ceasing to be a slave owner, by freeing his

slaves. Likewise, the only way a ruling class could become a servant of the people is by ceasing to be a ruling class, by relinquishing all of its power. “Government” cannot serve the people unless it ceases to be “government.”

Another example of irrational statist doctrine is the concept of the “rule of law.” The idea is that rule by mere men is bad, because it serves those with a malicious lust for power, while the “rule of law,” as the theory goes, is all about objective, reasonable rules being imposed upon humanity equally. A moment’s thought reveals the absurdity of this myth. Despite the fact that “the law” is often spoken of as some holy infallible set of rules spontaneously flowing from the nature of the universe, in reality “the law” is simply a collection of commands issued and enforced by the people in “government.” There would be a difference between “rule of law” and “rule of men” only if the so-called “laws” were written by something other than men.

The Secret Ingredient

In their attempts to justify the existence of a ruling class (”government”), statists often describe perfectly reasonable, legitimate, useful things, and then proclaim them to be “government.” They may argue, “Once people cooperate to form an organized system of mutual defense, that’s government.” Or they may claim, “When people collectively decide the way things like roads and commerce and property rights will work in their town, that’s government.” Or they may say, “When people pool their resources, to do things collectively rather than each individual having to do everything for himself, that is government.” None of those statements are true.

Such assertions are intended to make “government” sound like a natural, legitimate, and useful part of human society. But all of them completely miss the fundamental nature of “government.” “Government” is not organization, cooperation, or mutual agreement. Countless groups and organizations – supermarkets, football teams, car companies, archery clubs, etc. – engage in cooperative, mutually beneficial collective actions, but they are not called “government,” because they are not imagined to have the right to rule. And that is the secret ingredient that makes something “authority”: the supposed right to forcibly control others. [MORE]

Neuropeans Exact “Justice" on Cosby [Angry Payback on a Used Up “Showcase Black" in a “lawless society"]: Racist Suspect Judge Rules 81 yr old w/Bad Eyesight Remains ‘Sexually Violent” & Dangerous

From [HERE] and [HERE] “Showcase Black” Bill Cosby, who for years dodged accusations that he had preyed on women while brightening America’s living rooms as a beloved father figure, left a courtroom in handcuffs on Tuesday after he was sentenced to three to 10 years in prison for sexually assaulting a woman in his home.

The sentence capped Mr. Cosby’s stunning fall from a towering figure in popular culture to an 81-year-old convicted sex offender.

“It is time for justice,” Judge Steven T. O’Neill said as he announced the term. “Mr. Cosby, this has all circled back to you. The day has come. The time has come.” Acknowledging the impact that the case has had on Mr. Cosby’s legacy, Judge O’Neill added: “Fallen angels suffer most.”

Mr. Cosby, who has said he will appeal the conviction, was denied bail and ordered to prison immediately. As he listened to his sentence, Mr. Cosby leaned back in his seat, staring at the ceiling, and then gazed calmly forward. He declined to address the courtroom before hearing his fate, and did not react when the sentence was announced. Just before 3 p.m., Mr. Cosby was taken into custody.

The judge on Tuesday also upheld a Pennsylvania state board finding that officially categorized Mr. Cosby as a sexually violent predator, meaning he must undergo counseling for the rest of his life; report quarterly to authorities; and be registered as a sex offender. A psychologist who testified for the defense on Tuesday said he did not find Mr. Cosby to be a risk to the community,

A sexually violent predator is defined as a person with “a mental abnormality or personality disorder that makes the person likely to engage in predatory sexually violent offenses,” according to Pennsylvania state law. The classification means Cosby will have to register as a sex offender for the rest of his life. Additionally, the sexually violent predator designation demands a more active notification on the sex offender registry list, including registering upon release, informing state police of changes of residence or employer, monthly therapy sessions and quarterly in-person interviews with state police.[MORE]

According to FUNKTIONARY:

The Do-Gooders - that most dangerous tribe of pseudo-moralists armed with ignorance and golden rulers. The do-gooders absence of the true nature of Self (the T Am,') strengthen all the forces of illusion and collusion and ensure the continuity to the realm of unreality for the sleep-walking masses. "The world suffers most from the disinterested tyranny of its well-wisher." -Rabinath Tagore. (See: Status-Quoticians & The Golden Rule).

Black Rolebots Hook Each Other Up in Service of Master: No Jail Time Plea Accepted by Detroit Cop Charged w/Falsifying Reports, Destroying Evidence & Felony Assault on Black Man at Gas Station

COULD RACISTS DO IT ANY BETTER?  Black probot Kym Worthy  is the current prosecutor of Wayne County, Michigan, home to Detroit. She is the first African-American and the first woman to become the Wayne County prosecutor. As a Strawboss, she has her finger on the nuclear button for elite racists. Worthy is mostly known for taking down unfiltered Black mayor Kwame Kilpatrick. She has also hooked up a bunch of cops who have harmed or murdered Black people. Black droids or bots are programmed in all areas of activity to do things against the interests of Black folks. Back in the day these bots actually ran plantations for master remotely- that is, w/o any white overseers around. 

Here, after a Black cop used his authority to feloniously assault a black man, destroy evidence, create false reports to cover up and unlawfully arrested & detained him for 63 hours never charging him with a crime, Worthy sends a clear message to the community about who she serves. How will master reward her?

From [HERE] This entire case is centered around cellphone video from inside a Detroit gas station. 

It led to an excessive force allegation and civil lawsuit that wrapped up on Friday.

In Video Black Cop Shouts to Black Man filming, “Who Gives a Fuck About that Bitch Ass Camera?” 1 Year Later Detroit Prosecutors answer back - ‘Nobody Nigger.’ When Black People Believe in White Supremacy It Makes Them Literally Crazy =Mentacide.

It happened May 31, 2017 at a Mobil gas station on Harper Avenue in Detroit. The officer shown on video throwing a man to the ground is Richard Billingslea. He used pepper spray on the man then threw him to the ground. 

It's still unclear what exactly led up to the altercation. Video from the gas station shows the men circling around gas pumps. Some say the man, Michaele Jackson, took a swing at the officer. Others say there was an ongoing dispute between the two. 

Either way, Wayne County prosecutors felt this was too much and charged Billingslea with assault with intent to do great bodily harm, aggravated assault, obstruction of justice, and assault and battery.

The case was headed to trial but Billingslea opted for a no contest plea. 

He was sentenced Friday to two years probation. He will be required to take an anger management course, and will not be allowed to own or use a weapon.

Billingslea can no longer work in law enforcement, and is not allowed to have contact with the victims.

Officer's report indicates force needed to make arrest

The police report written by Billingslea indicates that he was attempting to place Jackson under arrest, but was unable to without the use of force.

Jackson was arrested while another man, D’Marco Craft, shown on the video was released at the scene. Jackson was not released from custody until June 2. He spent 63 hours in custody. Neither man was ever charged with a crime. 

A civil lawsuit claims Billingslea took Craft's cellphone and slammed it on the gas station counter top, smashing the screen. Furthermore, the officer also threw the cellphone in a garbage container at the gas station, according to the lawsuit. A different police officer later retrieved the phone and placed it into evidence. Craft later retrieved the cellphone from police. 

Craft and Jackson were represented by Southfield-based attorneys Solomon M. Radner and Ari Kresch. 

“The police report is clearly a fabrication and is in direct conflict with the footage from Mr. Craft’s cell phone. It’s outrageous that the officers who are supposed to protect the rights of their citizens behave in such an unwarranted, aggressive and cruel manner,” Radner said in a news release. 

A statement from Radner and Kresch also alleges Billingslea and Patterson violated the Detroit Police Department's policy on pursuing suspects back in 2015. The officers allegedly were chasing a man who crashed June 24, 2015 and killed two young children. 

Martavious Banks on Life Support: Cops Did an Insurance Check Prior to Stop of Properly Driven Car, then Chased Black Man & Shot Him to Death. Body & Dashcams Off, Witness Says it was Murder

MEDIA FOCUSES ON BODY CAMS - NOT MURDER BY COPS. eyewitness testimony is only important to the media if the witness is white or cops are not accused of crimes

White Supremacy Mystery Hanging Like a Loose Noose in Memphis. From [HERE] and [HERE] The Black man who was shot by an Memphis police officer is now on life-support, according to his family. 

Martavious Banks, 25, was shot by an MPD officer on Sept. 17 after a traffic stop in South Memphis. 

His family previously said he remained in critical condition at Regional One after the shooting, and Banks had a collapsed lung as of Friday. His mother told FOX13 on Monday that Banks had been placed on life support at some point over the weekend, and he remains there now.

It is unclear what his status is moving forward.

Police have not released the names of the officers who were involved in the shooting, but all three were “relieved of duty” pending an investigation by the TBI. 

Martavious Banks, 25, was shot last Monday evening by a Memphis police officer in South Memphis. Police say officers stopped Banks in a car near the intersection of Gill Avenue and Pillow Street. Cops apparently stopped him to do an “insurance check.” [MORE] That is, he did not commit any traffic infraction or moving violation. Police said they pulled Banks over after checking the license plate on the car he was driving. The scan raised questions about insurance coverage. It was his mother's car. It is unknown why they decided to check his plate. [MORE]

[A police officer's check of a vehicle registration in a database is not a Fourth Amendment search, in the 6th Circuit and apparently every other circuit that has considered the issue United States v. Ellison , 462 F.3d 557, 561–63 (5th, 6th, 7th, 9th, 10th Circuits) - “Because they are in plain view, no privacy interest exists in license plates” See United States v. Miranda-Sotolongo, 827 F.3d 663 (7th Cir., 2016). Because of the ever creeping expanding powers of the state, constitutional protections are meaningless on the street and offer no protection to Black people from cops. Believe in such nonsense at your own peril.]

The media has not reported on whether the vehicle was insured.

Banks drove off during the first traffic stop, according to police, and was stopped again nearby after hitting a curb. 

Police say Banks was shot by an officer during a confrontation after fleeing on foot. The police department has said a gun was found in the area, but has not released details.

The officer who shot Banks did not have his body camera operating during the event, according to Police Director Michael Rallings, though a police spokesperson said it’s unclear if he switched it off or never had it turned on. Police also may have improperly switched off his dashboard camera

Rallings said two additional officers who were involved in a traffic stop before the shooting deactivated either their body-worn cameras or in-car video systems during a pursuit. One of the officers involved – not the primary officer who shot Banks – is the son of Memphis Police Association President Michael Williams. 

Banks' mother and witnesses contested police accounts, saying Banks was running away when he was shot. Banks' family disputed claims that he was armed. Banks remained in critical condition Friday. 

Officers also failed to warn Banks that they would shoot,  Thoedus Hibbler, a witness who came forward, said. From his front porch that sits at an elevated vantage point on the 1200 block of Gill Street, Hibbler said he is just as perplexed as he was Monday evening when he said he saw his neighbor shot by police.

"As he got out of the car, they started (shooting)," said Hibbler. "There was no lights on, no sirens, nothing. It was like, he started running from them and they just started shooting right away."

Though he lives five houses down from the shooting scene, Hibbler is adamant about what he saw. The shooting occurred around 6:30 p.m., while there was still plenty of daylight.

Hibbler isn't the only one who asserts that Banks was running from the police when he was shot. [MORE] and [MORE]

12 bullet holes were found inside the home in the 1200 block of Gill Avenue. Witnesses say Memphis police chased Martavious Banks, 25, inside the home and fired multiple shots at him Monday night while innocent residents ducked for cover and watched in shock. Some bullets were found at the front door and others were scattered across the walls and even in the kitchen. [MORE]

"They left him laying for, like, 30 minutes," a witness said. "I'm still in shock. They were trying to put me in the car. I was still trying to run."

An NAACp statement said, “The dash cameras and body cameras that were demanded by the public should be used at all times by police officers.  When trying to determine fault and ensure justice, and in order to create meaningful dialogue, we need to be able to assess the involvement of all parties, and not depend on strictly word-of-mouth testimony.”  

Memphis Police Department leaders revealed Tuesday to city council members there isn't a standard punishment for officers who turn off their body cameras. Three officers are on leave and Tennessee Bureau of Investigation is investigating because their body cameras weren’t activated.

Routine traffic stops of Black men in by Memphis police too often result in tragedies. [MORE]

Study Finds Black & Latino Students are Targets of Police Brutality in Public Fool Systems [Part of the School-to-Blind-Obedience-to-Authority Pipeline]

According to FUNKTIONARY

Public schools - the instrument of Hidalgo (the "Greater System") and the "State" whereby readers, writers and counters are produced who are certified as qualified to understand orders and obediently carry them out... the tenth gang-plank of the Communist Manifesto. (See: Compulsory Schooling, Indoctrination & Formal Education)

Public Fool System - a place where children are having unprotected education. 2) a syndromatic exercise in conformity and blind obedience to so-called "authority" (disguised repression). 3) systematic planned violence meted out on children and young adults—held hostage and hostile—daily, hourly, quarantined from the natural rhythm of things in life through Pavlovian bells and shrink-wrapped prefabricated and curriculum and distorted history. 4) a training boot camp for life-long slavery and indentured servitude to gangbankers and the Corporate State in a society created and based in violence, governed by fear, propaganda, psychogenic money and power.

html5 video converter by EasyHtml5Video.com v3.9.1

"education" - word-generated opinions combined with force for control over competent hue-mans. 2) coercive persuasion. 3) indoctrination and regimentation. 4) braindraining. 5) developing the powers and faculties of a person. "Developing the powers" means de-veloping, or dis-veloping the powers, which means to negate, or have a privative, or reversing force on the powers. •"The invisible capital which enables its possessors to remain, or to climb on, the backs of the uneducated and to fill their heads with prejudices useful for the maintenance of either the old or the new status quo. It's Squid Pro Row, baby. -Austin Powers. The whole machinery of "education" is to make you mechanical—devoid of intelligence—reduced to an academented drone or a conforming clone for the marketplace of "society." "True education is that which is experienced, tested and digested. What can be counted and recorded is not education." -Vinoba Bhave. What passes for "an" education is second-hand experiences, misconceptions filtered through memories and lies sold in units. True education is transformative, fluid and lifelong. (See: De-education, Experience, Academented, Knowledge Scrolling, Pedagogy, Democracy, Dead Knowledge, Transformative Education, Efficiency, Language, Develop, Envelope, School, Devotion & Learning)

In Accord with Nike’s "Propagenda" [or Predictive Programming for Blacks to Accept Nike’s Agenda as Their Own] "Showcase Black" Jenifer Lewis Wears Nike to Thank Them for “leading the resistance"

Showcase Blacks Have Priceless Value to Racists in the System of Racism/White Supremacy. Bear in mind that white supremacists/racists control the show. Showcase Blacks are not showcasing themselves, they are being showcased by white supremacists to promote some aspect of RSW. A function of showcase blacks is to control the spectrum of ideas discussed by Blacks, control the parameters of dissent and define what kinds of ideas are "civilized" and "reasonable." [MORE]

From [HERE] Nike’s latest “Just Do It” ad campaign includes a number of showcase Black athletes: LeBron James, Serena Williams, Odell Beckham Jr. — and non-showcase Black, Colin Kaepernick.

Kaepernick’s activism was audaciously displayed on a larger platform in Nike’s multi-national ad campaign, featuring a video and image of Kaepernick with the tagline: “Believe in something. Even if it means sacrificing everything.” [their slogan diminishes Kaepernick to a “believer.” How stupid. Kaepernick spoke about what he saw, experienced and knew to be reality; a system of oppression that refuses to punish white cops who murder Blacks in broad daylight and rewards them for doing so. Racism and its symptom, police brutality are highly observable phenomenons. He did need not “beliefs.” Persons who sacrifice for beliefs want to be deceived - “a Believer is one who accepts that which has no basis in reality. 2) a person who enjoys being deceived. A believer does not seek—just accepts theologies and/or ideologies.” To the contrary, K-Nick challenged people who cling to jesusized beliefs in “democracy,” “authority” and “government” despite tangible, visible evidence showing otherwise. He gambled - or risked the known for the unknown. A better slogan might be “Only gamblers know what life is, Are you willing to take a risk to attain freedom from an oppressive system?]

Nike’s move led to more uproar from Kaepernick’s critics. Some white customers even ceremoniously burned their Nike apparel and called for a boycott of the company. But for Nike’s core customers — millennials and young urban men — this ad sent a strong message of solidarity.

Consumers and celebrities alike are now supporting Nike for giving Kaepernick that platform. In less than 24 hours after announcing Kaepernick as the face of their new marketing campaign, the sportswear company received more than $43 million worth of mostly positive media exposure, one report estimates.

“What can I do that’s meaningful?” asked Blackish star Jenifer Lewis as she donned a Nike sweater on the Emmys red carpet. “I’ll wear Nike. I’ll wear Nike to say thank you. Thank you for leading the resistance! We need more corporate America to stand up also.”

Some are questioning Nike’s motives. Guardian writer Arwa Mahdawi accused Nike of the latest capitalistic trend, “woke-washing” — that is, using “progressive values as a marketing ploy, appropriating social activism as a form of advertising.” [MORE]

At this point it is probably a good time to think about what “the resistance” is and what it is resisting, what it wants and who it wants it from.

Black “resisters” want “authorities” to enforce existing laws against cops. For the most part, they are not seeking the creation or termination of laws. That is, the “resistance” wants;

1) cops to be held liable in civll courts when they harm or execute Blacks and Latinos and

2) the Government to hold cops accountable for crimes committed against Blacks and Latinos and be subjected to discipline or termination in a process they can participate in and

3) to stop cops from interfering with their “rights” and harming and killing them.

No radical stuff here. What could be extremist about protesting against conduct that is already illegal? The “resistance” or BLM is what it is - people should be upset when so called “government servants” attack “citizens.” BLM or the resisters are asking cops and prosecutors to do their jobs. The resistance is simply seeking enforcement of the status quo [upholding existing laws] and equal treatment under the law. For the most part, BLM effectively organizes non-violent, lawful protests aimed at police after they unlawfully harm or kill Blacks or Latinos.

Yet, through propaganda and “propagenda” elite racists in government and media have given the public the perception that they are doing something much more than just simply blowing off steam. Like picking up the wrong luggage at the airport the resistance is perceived and has misperceived itself to be carrying on a struggle like Malcolm X or the BPP waged back in the day.

Debate in a de-mockery cannot be stilled but it can be controlled and constrained within “proper” bounds. Doggy sets the table for us or “controls the spectrum of ideas” discussed by “citizens” - encouraging us to think within certain boundaries of “thinkable thought” while enforcing the belief that freedom reigns. Such debate or “resistance” is desirable for tyrants in a corporate police state because it keeps the peasants thinking they are participating, knowledgable or involved without providing them any real means to achieve freedom.” [MORE] Dr. Amos Wilson states, "the central aim of the ruling elite's ideology process is to define the "domain of discourse." That is, the corporate elite seeks to define the limits of "acceptable ideas" and to define what is worth talking about, worth learning, teaching, promoting, and writing about. Of course, the limits of the "acceptable," the "responsible," are set at those points which support and justify the interests of the elite itself." [MORE]

In reality, the alleged “resistance” is really very tame politics engaged in by obedient citizens also known as propagandhi. Elites have drawn the parameters of Black dissent by programming Blacks to believe that what is actually common sense and essentially conservative is somehow "radical" politics. Therefore, Blacks reject common sense in rejecting "the radical" or what is perceived as "radical." Consequently, law abiding or obedient Blacks will not pursue things that anyone else with common sense would pursue- because to do so would be revolutionary! The resisters are not resisting anything. They are expressing genuine, common sense outrage at an unaccountable system of white collective power: racist suspect jurors, judges, prosecutors, fellow cops, media and businesses that support, defend and finance a cop’s right to murder or harm Blacks. But what else?

So long as the agenda is limited to better police training, more diverse police forces, enhancing police-community relations with better shows of “respect,” the use of body cameras, appeals to morality and other “properly framed” issues, then the game is basically over; excluded from the discussion/protest are defunding, terminating or disarming police departments, ending the doctrine of qualified immunity, questioning the role of courts, prosecutors & police in the face of historically low crime rates in the nation’s largest urban areas and much larger issues such as how to attain power to stop racists from practicing racism against us, examination of our own consensual role in the system of racism white supremacy, how to hold government accountable, the legitimacy of government in the first place, its authority or its right to “represent us” and rule over us and whether government is even needed.

It would also be completely “out the box” for resisters to advocate for self-defense or violent disobedience or protest. Elites have programmed Blacks to advocate a philosophy of non-violence and disarmament. This ideology fails to take into account that the other people surrounding Blacks - that is, racist white people, are not non-violent and are functioning as genocidal psychopaths in their provocative relations with Blacks. It also falsely assumes governments and police exist to protect us. ‘Non-violence has made Black people just like butter – you just cut into them with your knife, and there is no response just reaction with no meaningful repercussions. And thousands can be killed and demeaned without any violent resistance, because resistance would be violence and disobedience to authority.’

The resistance feels busy by heckling NFL fans in the parking lot and blocking traffic or disrupting shoppers buying Christmas gifts. But these activities and many more are absolutely ineffectual and ultimately have nothing to do with fighting the power of racism white supremacy. Along with voting, elite racists allow the resistance to protest as non-violent outlets for their dissatisfaction. Allowing them to vent, complain and debate - - but at the end of the day Blacks do as they are told. Such activities are just placebos to keep Blacks and Latinos under control in a white over Black system.

Chancellor Williams and Dr. Cress Welsing have both explained that most Blacks 'continue to live in a dream world where they believe that singing, dancing, marching, praying and hoping will solve their problems.' [MORE]

To the extent that resisters predicate “police reform” efforts around the belief that cops exist to protect and serve their communities they are disillusioned. Cops exist primarily to manage the behavior of Blacks & Latinos within a free-range prison controlled by Government. Their goal is to place you in greater confinement.  As Dr. Blynd observes, "people who are awake see cops as mercenary guards that remind us daily through acts of force, that we are simultaneously both enemies and slaves of the Corporate State - colonized, surveilled and patrolled by the desensitized and lobotomized drones of the colonizers." Their authority is not legitimate because none is - it is a main source of your oppression. It is rule through your coerced participation and nothing more. Any protection from cops is incidental and random - making us safe is not their goal.

To the extent that protesters efforts are primarily aimed at transforming the thinking and conduct of racists or convincing racists of their inhumanity, such efforts are somnambulistically complementary to the system of racism/white supremacy. Perhaps it is even flattery. Asking master "to do the right thing" at this point in history misses the point entirely and "it is pathological for Blacks to keep attempting moral suasion on a people who have no ethics or morality where race is a variable"- perhaps a sign of a mental disorder. The master-servant relationship must be destroyed, not updated and refined. 

Individuals in “the resistance” discuss racism as bigotry or bad attitudes & behavior, mean words, stereotypes, disrespect and inconveniences to Black people. They do not discuss racism as white supremacy and white supremacy as racism. Belief that racism is only bigotry is a vital part of false programming sold to Blacks and Latinos by the vested interests for their cooperation and submission to their own oppression. [MORE] Defining racism in terms of bad attitude or bigotry leads to solving the wrong problems. [MORE]

Dr. Blynd explains, "Racism is not individualistic, but institutional, cultural, economic, political, linguistic, self-perpetuating and systematic." White Supremacy is a power group dynamic involving the relationship between whites and Blacks in a vast system of unequal power. It is economic discrimination by one group over and against another for the purposes of subjugation and/or maintaining the imbalance of power through cooperative control, misinformation, indoctrination, genocide and oppression. [MORE]  The system of racism/white supremacy is a system of vast unequal power between whites and non-whites. Racists practice racism because they have the power to do so. As explained by Dr. Amos Wilson, 'to end racism/white supremacy we must end or neutralize white power.' [MORE]

Although the system of racism/white supremacy is a main source of Black people’s oppression and dominance, it is not part of the resistance. Rather, it is focused on police brutality and the unequal administration of laws as independent “civil rights issues examined outside the context of racism/white supremacy and not as another symptom of racism/white supremacy - that is, they examine police brutality the way white liberals have defined it for them. Therefore, discussion never concerns how to attain the power to stop racists from practicing racism against them.

The “resistance” can be co-opted by anyone because it is not asking for anything except for better relations with their masters or public rulers. Choices or sides presented by the resistance are false - all statists want the law to be enforced and believe the government serves them despite all evidence to the contrary.

Is there a meaningful counter-protest to “the resistance” - a thoughtful, substantive pro-police brutality argument opposing it? There are few people who articulate support for police brutality and non-enforcement of the law without sounding like neanderthals. This is whitenology, a trick. Like fighting the darkness - consuming your time and energy wrestling with some invisible shit.

Seeking better relations with masters or public rulers is really not dissimilar to the many different plantations that existed during slavery days. Slave masters varied - some plantations offered slaves more privileges, responsibilities and allowances- others were more punitive and maintained by mean cracker slave masters. Obviously, slaves preferred to be on the less punitive master’s planation. Efforts for better relations on the planation only strengthen belief in the authority of the public rulers or masters. So long as they remain masters, they will never serve slaves or be equal with them.

FUNKTIONARY defines “corporate responsibility” as “an oxymoron 2) profits over humanity. No fiction can be accountable to conscious life.” A corporation is “an indispensable tool of Doggy, Hidalgo, Crimethlnc. and the Greater System for the promotion of White Supremacy and the dehumanization and objectification of all biophilic life-forms and life-force. As long as fictions are recognized as having the same rights as flesh-blood and spirit and sanctioned to run amok, more people will continue to be out of control renting their life-style instead of being in control owning and living their own lives.”

Nike and the NFL are large corporations motivated by profit, not securing “justice.” Both corporations are controlled by racist suspects who benefit from the current operating system (OS) and status quo. Nike thoroughly checked out its demographic data and figured its young, progressive, large urban base of consumers probably supported “the resistance.” Unlike Kaepernick they risked very little and are now setting record high profits. In fact, according to Fortune, the Kaepernick’s ads pushed Nike’s market value up $6 Billion, to an all-time high. Such profits probably increase every time some hick county or police department says they are no longer purchasing Nike products. In contrast, the NFL’s [the mean cracker master] demographic is is 83 percent white and 64 percent male and its corporate base of advertisers are elite whites. The NFL also risks very little for its promotions and policy to support “standing up” for the pledge of allegiance at games with said consumer and corporate base [a showing of involuntary servitude]. To the chagrin of “resisters” '[believing they have power that does not exist] NFL advertising revenues are also up [stances against the flag galvanize the NFL fan base in the same way Obama galvanizes the GOP base]. Ultimately, neither stance does anything to alter Black people’s relationship with white people in a white over Black system. But the participants on “both sides” righteously “feel like” they are engaged in a battle and like they are participating in an open society that is in actual reality a granfalloon only existing in between their two ears - a mind fuck or trick bag. Wearing Nike has nothing to do with challenging government authority or racism/white supremacy.

[SNigger Sleeping Toms Spike Lee and Stephen A. Smith discuss nothing really and never offend their masters.]

BI-PARTISAN TYRANNY. This construct is the same nonsense used in electoral politics. The deomcratic and republican parties both function as plantations. With regard to Blacks and Latino citizen-subjects, the democratic party is the nicer, kinder master with its plantation offering more “respect”, privileges and responsibilities to them. Larken Rose states, “There is a big difference between striving for a new, wiser, nobler master, and striving for a world of equals, where there are no masters and no slaves. Likewise, there is a big difference between a slave who believes in the principle of freedom, and a slave whose ultimate goal is to become the new master. And this is true, even if that slave truly intends to be a kind and generous master . . . As long as the people believe in the myth of “authority,” every downfall of one tyrant will be followed by the creation and growth of a new tyrant. “ Rose further explains the following:

“Among those who vote Democrat or Republican – or for any other party – no one recognizes the underlying problem, and as a result, no one ever gets any closer to a solution. They remain slaves, because their thoughts and discussions are limited to the pointless question of who should be their master. They never consider – and dare not allow themselves to consider – the possibility that they should have no master at all. As a result, they focus entirely on political action of one kind or another, But the foundation of all political action is the belief in “authority,” which is the problem itself So the efforts of statists are, and always will be, doomed to fail.

Unfortunately, this is also true of the less mainstream, supposedly more pro-freedom “political movements,” including Constitutionalists, the Libertarian party, and others. As long as they think and act within the confines of the “government” game, their efforts are not only completely incapable of solving the problem but actually aggravate the problem by inadvertently legitimizing the system of domination and subjugation which wears the label of “government.”

The Rules of the Game

Even most people who claim to love liberty and to believe in “unalienable” rights allow the superstition of “authority” to drastically limit their effectiveness. Most of what such people do, in one way or another, consists of asking tyrants to change their “laws.” Whether activists campaign for or against a particular candidate, or lobby for or against a particular piece of “legislation,” they are merely reinforcing the assumption that obedience to authority is a moral imperative.

When activists try to convince politicians to decrease “taxes,” or repeal some “law,” those activists are implicitly admitting that they need permission from their masters in order to be free, And the man who “runs for office,” promising to fight for the people, is also implying that it is up to those in “government” to decide what the peasants will be allowed to do. As Daniel Webster put it, “There are men in all ages who mean to govern well, but they mean to govern; they promise to be good masters, but they mean to be masters.” Activists spend huge amounts of time, money and effort begging their masters to change their commands. Many even go out of their way to stress the fact that they are “working within the system,” and that they are not advocating anything “illegal.” This shows that, regardless of their displeasure with those in power, they still believe in the myth of “authority,” and will cooperate with “legal” injustice unless and until they can convince the masters to change the rules – to “legalize” justice. While the intended message of dissenters may be that they disapprove of what the masters are doing, the actual message that all political action sends to those in power is “We wish you would change your commands, but we will continue to obey whether you do or not.” The truth is, one who seeks to achieve freedom by petitioning those in power to give it to him has already failed, regardless of the response. To beg for the blessing of “authority” is to accept that the choice is the master’s alone to make, which means that the person is already, by definition, a slave.

One who begs for lower “taxes” is implicitly agreeing that it is up to the politicians how much a man may keep of what he has earned. One who begs the politicians not to disarm him (via “gun control”) is, by doing so, conceding that it is up to the master whether to let the man be armed or not. In fact, those who lobby for politicians to respect any of the people’s “unalienable rights” do not believe in unalienable rights at all. Rights which require “government” approval are not unalienable, and are not even rights. They are privileges, granted or withheld at the whim of the master. And those who hold positions of power know that they have nothing to fear from people who do nothing but pathetically beg for freedom and justice, However loudly the dissenters talk about “demanding” their rights, the message they actually send is this: “We agree, master, that it is up to you what we may and may not do.”

That underlying message can be seen in all sorts of activities mistakenly imagined to be forms of resistance. For example, people often engage in protests in front of “government” buildings, carrying signs, chanting slogans, sometimes even engaging in violence, to express their displeasure with what the masters are doing. However, even such “protests,” for the most part, do little more than reinforce authoritarianism. Marches, sit-ins, protests, and so on, are designed to send a message to the masters, the goal being to convince the masters to change their evil ways. But that message still implies that it is up to the masters what the people may do, which becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy: when the people feel beholden to an “authority,” they are beholden to an “authority.” Those in “government” derive all of their power from the fact that their subjects imagine them to have power.

Legitimizing Oppression

The harder people try to work within any political system to achieve freedom, the more they will reinforce, in their own minds and the minds of anyone watching, that the “system” is legitimate. Petitioning politicians to change their “laws” implies that those “laws” matter, and should be obeyed. Nothing better shows the power of the belief in “authority” than the spectacle of a hundred million people begging a few hundred politicians for lower “taxes.” If the people truly understood that the fruits of a man’s labor are his own, they would never engage in such lunacy; they would simply stop surrendering their property to the political parasites. Their trained-in desire to have the approval of “authority” creates in them a mindset not unlike the mindset of a slave: they literally feel bad about keeping their own money and making their own choices without first getting the master’s permission to do so. Even when freedom is theirs for the taking, statists continue to grovel at the feet of megalomaniacs, begging for freedom, thus ensuring that they will never be free.

The truth is, one cannot believe in “authority” and be free, because accepting the myth of “government” is accepting one’s own obligation to obey a master, which means accepting one’s own enslavement. Sadly, many people believe that begging the master, via “political action,” is all they can do, So they forever engage in rituals which only legitimize the slave-master relationship, instead of simply disobeying the tyrants. The idea of disobeying “authority,” “breaking the law,” and being “criminals” is more disturbing to them than the idea of being a slave.

Those who want a significantly lower level of authoritarian control and coercion are sometimes accused of being “anti-government,” an allegation most vehemently deny, saying that they are not against “government” per se, but only want better “government.” But by their own words they are admitting that they do not believe in true freedom, but still believe in the Divine Right of Politicians and the idea that a ruling class can be a good and legitimate thing. Only someone who still feels an abiding obligation to obey the commands of politicians would want to avoid being labeled “anti-government.” Since “government” always consists of aggression and domination, one cannot be truly pro- freedom without being anti-”government.” The fact that so many activists reject that label (”anti-government”) shows how deeply ingrained the superstition of “authority” remains, even in the minds of those who imagine themselves to be ardent advocates of individual liberty.

(… But the road to true freedom has never been, and will never be, a new political ritual, a new “legal” document or argument, or any other form of “political” action. The only road to true freedom is for the individual to let go of his own attachment to the superstition of “authority.”)" [MORE]

Study says Racism Causing Mental Health Problems for Latino & Asian Teens [a major goal of white supremacy is the Annihilation of Black & Brown Self-Respect]

A MAJOR GOAL OF RACISM/WHITE SUPREMACY IS THE CREATION OF A FALSIFIED CONSCIOUSNESS. From [HERE] Latino and Asian adolescents who face racial or ethnic discrimination are more likely to experience depression, poor self-esteem, lower academic achievement, substance use and risky sexual behavior, according to a new meta-analysis published in the journal American Psychologist.

The findings reveal that young people of Asian and Latino backgrounds were at greater risk for these factors than African-American youth. In addition, the impact of discrimination on Latino youth’s academic performance was more pronounced than in African-American adolescents.

The study is the first to investigate the impact of perceived racial and ethnic discrimination on adolescents using meta-analyses.

“Much of what we know about the pernicious effects of racial/ethnic discrimination is based on adult populations. Our work represents the first efforts to quantify in a meta-analytic frame the strength of effects of racial and ethnic discrimination on adolescents’ academics and risky health behaviors,” said lead author Aprile D. Benner, Ph.D.

“The consistent relations we identified are of particular concern, given the long-term linkages between depression, anxiety, substance use, aggression, hostility, and poor academic performance and engagement with an individual’s risk of illness or early death,” said Benner, who is an associate professor of human development and family sciences and a faculty research associate at the Population Research Center at The University of Texas at Austin.

For the analysis, the researchers looked at 214 peer-reviewed articles, theses and dissertations comprising 91,338 adolescents. They identified 11 distinct indicators of well-being.

Awareness of racial and ethnic differences begins very early in life, the study noted. Babies as young as 6 months can sense it, and children begin grouping themselves by race or ethnic background as early as the preschool years.

Recognition of cultural stereotypes tied to skin color or ethnicity emerges in middle childhood, and by age 10, many children can identify both open and hidden discrimination, according to previous research.

Overall, the new findings show that perceived racial/ethnic discrimination is consistently associated with poorer mental health, lower academic achievement and more engagement in risky or negative behaviors.

The study also found that Latino youth tend to exhibit higher levels of depression than their white and African-American peers in response to discrimination, and that discrimination is more detrimental to Latino males’ academics, compared with Latinas and African-descent males.

The researchers hypothesize that Latinos may experience a type of discrimination in which they are viewed as “perpetual foreigners.” Additionally, they suggest that African-American youth may benefit from their families’ use of socialization strategies to prepare their children for the biases they may face in their daily lives.

“The psychological, behavioral and academic burdens posed by racial and ethnic discrimination during adolescence, coupled with evidence that experiences of discrimination persist across the life course for persons of color, point to discrimination as a clear contributor to the racial and ethnic disparities observed for African-American, Latino and Native American populations compared with their white counterparts,” Benner said.

“While the past three decades have seen a major increase in attention to issues of racial and ethnic discrimination in adolescence, we have identified substantial gaps that should be addressed in future research.”

These include thinking more critically about how the field measures racial and ethnic discrimination in these populations; studying and clearly reporting factors that might protect young people from the adverse effects of discrimination; and placing a greater focus on the intersection of discrimination tied to race or ethnicity with mistreatment linked to other social identities that are more susceptible to stigmatization.

US Authorities Trying to Disappear Anarchist 3D Gun Maker who Dared to Challenge his Slavery - Detained in Taiwan, then Deported & Released in Texas

From [HERE] An anarchist running a 3D-printed guns company who flew to Taiwan as police investigated an accusation that he had sex with an underage girl was apprehended in Taipei on Friday after US authorities annulled his passport, officials said. [prison to prison transfer]

Cody Wilson, 30, was taken to immigration authorities in the capital by officers from Taiwan’s Criminal Investigation Bureau, according to local media reports and an official from the bureau who asked not to be named. However, two Taiwanese officials denied Wilson was arrested or in custody. His exact status was unclear.

Wilson, who is at the center of a US legal battle over his plan to publish instructions for the manufacture of 3D-printed plastic guns, flew into Taiwan legally, the country’s National Immigration Agency said in a statement on Friday. Because his US passport was later annulled, the agency’s statement said, he “no longer has the legal status to stay in Taiwan”.

Wilson was deported and placed on a flight from Taipei to Texas, landing at Bush Intercontinental Airport overnight on Sunday. He was released from jail in Harris County, Texas after posting $150,000 bond on Sunday. [MORE]

Wilson is the founder of Defense Distributed, the focus of a legal and political battle over its placing on the internet blueprints for plastic guns that can be made with a 3D printer.

The files could previously be downloaded for nothing, but a federal judge issued a nationwide injunction last month that blocked the posting of the blueprints online. [MORE]

“Slaves - Disarmed men and women.”

“Gun Ban - the precursor to servitude.”

GTL & Securus Tech Getting Richer Off Prison Book Bans by Overcharging Inmates: Emails 47¢ each, Video Chats $30 for 20 minutes & $147 Tablets to Access Pay-per-view Censored Book Collection

Racist suspect, Richard "Rick" Smith is Chief Executive Officer at Securus Technologies Inc.

From [HERE] Ebooks could be a blessing for prison inmates, with thousands of titles available with one click from one small device. But, as with most other technological innovations introduced in US prisons, they come with a dark side.

Earlier this month, the Pennsylvania Department of Corrections announced that inmates would no longer be able to receive physical books from outside organizations or inmate’s families. Instead, the state’s prison system would be switching to ebooks. These will be available on tablets sold by prison telecommunications giant GTL.

The book ban was part of an announcement about security measures aimed at limiting contraband flowing into Pennsylvania’s prisons. This follows a series of incidents where prison staff reported falling ill; authorities linked the illnesses with exposure to synthetic drugs coming into the facilities. (Experts told the Philadelphia Inquirer that the incidents may have been overblown.)

So why is the switch to ebooks such a bad thing?

Books that are donated by nonprofits or sent by families are free for inmates. Ebooks are not.

GTL tablets—on which inmates can also listen to music, play games, and send emails—cost Pennsylvania inmates $147 plus tax. The ebooks that are available through GTL’s propriety system cost anywhere from $3 to $25 each to download, and as the Inquirer (paywall) points out, many of them are much more expensive than they would be in the outside world; Frank McCourt’s memoir Angela’s Ashes costs nearly twice as much through the system than to read it on a Kindle. (Inmates are even charged for free books accessed via the online repository Project Gutenberg).

These costs fall on inmates’ families, many of whom come from low-income backgrounds and are already struggling with countless other fees that the criminal-justice system forces them to pay, such as those for phone calls or surcharges for depositing cash into inmate accounts.

Then there’s the problem of the selection. The Inquirer notes that many books that are popular in prisons—like The Diary of Anne Frank, or books by John Grisham and Robert Ludlum—are not available on the ebook platform. Dictionaries and law textbooks, which are frequently requested, are also not available in the catalog. Neither are contemporary prison memoirs, or Michelle Alexander’s blockbuster book about the US criminal justice system, The New Jim Crow (which is banned by prison authorities around the country). By contrast, nonprofits that provide books to prisons are able to take personalized requests, giving inmates books that they actually need or want, Pittsburgh-based Book’Em told Slate.

Finally, there are risks associated with the tablets themselves. In Idaho, inmates were able to game a tablet system, crediting their bank accounts with thousands of dollars. Several days following the incident, Colorado’s prison system confiscated tablets from 18,000 inmates, claiming security reasons (and denying the Idaho event was related). It’s not hard to imagine a similar situation playing out in Pennsylvania, leaving inmates with even less access to literature.

The Pennsylvania DOC has emphasized that inmates will still be able to use prison libraries. But these are often scarcely supplied, and inmates hesitate to use them for a variety of reasons, such as restricted hours and severe punishments for losing a book, inmates told the Inquirer. They will also be able to request books from a centralized system.

“Prison tablets are touted as bringing the outside world to incarcerated people, but all they seem to be doing is bringing a new, captive market to telecom giants,” Wanda Bertram of the advocacy group the Prison Policy Initiative writes in a blog post.

This is part of a larger pattern in the prison telecommunications industry, which is dominated by two massive companies: GTL and Securus Technologies. In theory, giving inmates access to technology should be beneficial. Email could be a great way to supplement letters and phone calls between inmates and their families—but messages sent through tablets controlled by GTL or its competitors can cost 47 cents for each email, with extra fees for attachments. Video chats could be a convenient way for families to get in touch with their loved ones—but not when they cost $30 for 20 minutes, and are intended to limit in-person visits.

Reading books and connecting with their families helps maintain inmates’ humanity—while also reducing recidivism rates. Technology could boost this power—but too often, it’s working against it.

The Business of Punishment: How Forced Prison Labor Has Generated Revenue Since the Colonial Era

Video of Testimony in 4th & 5th Days of Jason Van Dyke Murder Trial, White Chicago Cop who Killed Laquan McDonald

Border Patrol Cops Boarding Buses 100 Miles from the Border Asking, “Are You A U.S. Citizen?" [Evaluating each Answer by Skin Color & Accent, Detaining Black & Brown People They Don't Believe]

YOUR “writes” are REALLY just words on paper. Race Soldiers so frequently abuse their power that no one can make a compelling argument that constitutional rights afford Non-White people any real protection from the Government.

From [HERE] When people are crossing a U.S. border, they expect to be asked about their citizenship. But not when they're driving up the East Coast.

U.S. Border Patrol agents are boarding buses from private lines like Greyhound and Concord Coach within 100 miles of a U.S. border, asking passengers if they're American citizens. It turns out agents are empowered to do this through a little-known law called the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952. There are more and more reports of officers stopping cars and buses.

Here's what happens, according to Dennis Harmon, division chief for the Border Patrol Houlton sector in Maine. Border Patrol agents set up immigration checkpoints on highways within 100 miles of a U.S. border. They stop every vehicle traveling on the road, and ask each person if they are a U.S. citizen. If the person replies, 'Yes,' they are a citizen, in most cases, they are free to go.

"If they are a citizen of the United States, there is no law or regulation that requires them to carry identification saying they're a citizen," Harmon tells Here & Now's Peter O'Dowd. "That simple verbal declaration of 'I was born in Lewiston, Maine, or Sioux Falls,' and that proves they're a United States citizen."

But it's up to the discretion of the officer to believe that the person is really a citizen. While U.S. citizens do not have to show officers documentation to prove they are a citizen, Harmon says non-U.S. citizens who have legal status are required by law to carry their papers.

This discretion is raising questions among civil rights advocates about whether racial profiling is at play. [lol - the entire purpose is to target and terrorize under the pre-tense of protecting puppetician’s political border]

Border Patrol says these checkpoints are nothing new. While the actual number is unknown, the American Civil Liberties Union says, according to news reports, that the federal government operates almost 170 checkpoints within the border zone.

But Border Patrol sometimes gets it wrong. In 2012, the New York legal aid group Families for Freedom successfully sued for records that showed at a bus station in Rochester, Border Patrol agents mistakenly arrested 300 people with legal status over the course of four years.

The ACLU has filed Freedom of Information Act lawsuits in Michigan, Southern California and Arizona hoping to force Border Patrol to turn over records of how often people are wrongfully detained at immigration checkpoints, says Thomas Dresslar, an ACLU spokesperson. Customs and Border Protection, which oversees U.S. Border Patrol, declined to comment on the pending lawsuits.

Not only is racial profiling at play, but the ACLU contends that Border Patrol agents are violating the Fourth Amendment, which protects Americans from unreasonable searches and seizures. In May, the ACLU won a lawsuit against Border Patrol earlier this year after it used an immigration checkpoint in New Hampshire to search cars for illegal drugs.

"The Fourth Amendment does apply in the so-called 100-mile zone," says Emma Bond, a staff attorney with the ACLU in Maine. "[Customs and Border Protection] does claim that within this 100-miles that they can stop anyone without a warrant, without probable cause, without reasonable suspicion. And yet, all of those things are the hallmark of Fourth Amendment protections."

Civil rights and immigration advocates also say that the 100-mile zone is too large. According to the ACLU, nearly two-thirds of the U.S. population live within the 100-mile zone, due to the location of many major cities along the coasts.

This means that if you live in Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Hawaii, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island or Vermont, you are completely or almost entirely within the zone and can be subject to Border Patrol immigration checkpoints.

If you do come face-to-face with an officer, Bond says you can invoke your right to remain silent and say you do not consent to a search. You can also use your smartphone or other device to record the interaction as long as you don't interfere with the officer, she says.

"It really is a question of what kind of society we want to live in," she says. "Well, I don't want to live in a society where I could be stopped by an armed law enforcement officer when I'm boarding a bus, when I'm going to the grocery store, when I'm going to work. And yet that's what [Customs and Border Protection] claims that they can do."

Ben Carson is Trump's Unqualified Straw Boss or Safe Negro, Loyal to the White Supremacist Ideology & Appointed to Ensure "Fair Housing" Matters are Handled Frivolously

According to FUNKTIONARY:   

Straw-Boss  - a Sambo who is appointed a certain oversight role for the white power Overseer. It is the job of the Straw Boss to establish a formal organization to effectively and systematically carry out the wishes of the white supremacist power matrix while serving his own personal needs and ends through patronage power. 2) a ranking SNigger. 3) Toby. 4) "Safe Negro." 5) responsible (to the white supremacist ideology) Negro. 6) the gatekeeper for black professional positions gained through (acquiesced) to various sexual positions. 7) Pork Chop Boy. (See SNigger & McNegro)

Negro - a man or woman of Afrikan descent living in pathological mental state of cultural abstinence and historical amnesia— one who wants to impress his or her oppressor while ignoring the effects and plight that his or her accommodationist posture inures. [MORE] 

Despite the fact housing discrimination persists (African Americans with good credit scores were 3.5 times as likely as whites with good credit scores to receive higher-interest-rate loans, and Latinos were 3.1 times as likely to receive such loans. And the Federal Reserve found that in 2009, African Americans were twice as likely to be denied a loan, even controlling for income and other qualifying criteria) SNigger Ben Carson believes that the Fair Housing Act needs to be weaker.

Racists often hire or promote unqualified and or incompetent disposable non-whites into positions of authority to do the bidding of racists or place them in department or agencies that are a low priority to the racist or that primarily concern non-whites. Such appointments are designed to promote confusion amongst those “serviced” and to ensure that situations or ‘cases in which non-whites are involved are handled frivolously, without regard to justice or proper correction. This type of injustice is just as deplorable as injustice done directly by overt racists.’ [MORE]

ABOVE, Black GOP Rolebots. Ben Carson and Alphonso Jackson, Bush’s pet negro in charge of HUD.

From [HERE] The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development awarded promotions and pay increases to five political operatives with no housing policy experience within their first months on the job, demonstrating what government watchdogs and career staff describe as a premium put on loyalty over expertise.

The raises, documented in a Washington Post analysis of HUD political hires, resulted in annual salaries between $98,000 and $155,000 for the five appointees, all of whom had worked on Donald Trump’s or Ben Carson’s presidential campaigns. Three of them did not list bachelor’s degrees on their résumés.

The political hires were among at least 24 people without evident housing policy experience who were appointed to the best-paying political positions at HUD, an agency charged with serving the poorest Americans. They account for a third of the 70 HUD appointees at the upper ranks of the federal government, with salaries above $94,000, according to the Post review of agency records.

The limited experience at the upper reaches of the agency — HUD Secretary Carson, a retired neurosurgeon, has no prior housing, executive or government background — injected confusion into the rollout of policy initiatives and brought delays to even routine functions, according to interviews with 16 current and former career staff members.

“This administration is different, because the people coming in really don’t know housing at all,” said Ron Ashford, who retired as director of HUD’s public-housing supportive-service programs in January after 22 years at the agency. “As a result, they’re pursuing initiatives that aren’t grounded in reality.”

The Post conducted its analysis of HUD appointees using government information on their salaries and positions through mid-March, obtained through a public-records request from the Office of Personnel Management. The Post also examined HUD documents — including official résumés, internal emails, appointee salaries and job titles, and documentation of promotions and other position changes — obtained as of mid-July by American Oversight, a watchdog group formed last year to investigate the Trump administration, through separate, multiple records requests as well as other publicly available information such as LinkedIn profiles.

Under the Obama administration, senior political appointees to HUD were widely recognized housing experts who were tapped to stabilize the agency after the housing market crash. Of the 66 most highly paid appointees, at least seven — 11 percent — appear to have lacked housing-related experience, according to a Post review of the professional backgrounds of those named in the 2012 Plum Book, a compilation of political appointees published every four years.

Of the 24 Trump administration HUD appointees without housing policy experience on their résumés or LinkedIn profiles, 16 listed work on either Carson’s or Trump’s presidential campaigns — or had personal connections to their families.

They include a former event manager turned senior HUD adviser making $131,767 after a 23 percent raise and a former real estate agent whose new job is to advise a HUD administrator, a longtime Trump family aide who also lacks housing credentials. [MORE]

Amnesty says Genocidal Israel Soldiers Murdered 6 Palestinians within 24 hours, some deaths may involve war crimes

From [HERE] The deaths of six Palestinians within just 24 hours is a horrific demonstration of the unnecessary or excessive force deployed by Israeli forces against Palestinian civilians in the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPT), Amnesty International said today.

Between 10pm on Monday 17 September and 8pm on Tuesday 18 September, Israeli forces killed four Palestinian men in the Gaza Strip using live ammunition . Within the same period, two more died as a result of the actions of Israeli forces in the West Bank, one after being beaten during the process of arrest and another shot dead in a busy street in East Jerusalem.

“The shocking fact that five Palestinians have been killed by the Israeli authorities and one died in their custody in just 24 hours is a chilling demonstration of the utter disregard for right to life. Several of these incidents appear to involve deliberate and wilful killing of unarmed civilians and may amount to war crimes,” said Saleh Higazi, Deputy Director for the Middle East and North Africa at Amnesty International.

“It is the fact that such crimes are rarely, if ever, punished that allows unlawful killings and other violations of the right to life to continue in shameless disregard of international law. These incidents are not new in the OPT and are likely to continue unless this cycle of impunity is broken.”

On Monday 17 September two Palestinian men were killed during an Israeli air strike that targeted them on the southern Gaza Strip. Gaza’s health ministry identified them as Naji Jamil Abu Assi, 18, and Alaa Ziyad Abu Assi, 21. The Israeli military has claimed that the men were targeted because they approached the Gaza-Israel boundary fence and placed a “suspicious object” nearby.

Information that Amnesty International collected confirms that the two men were unarmed and that there were no indications that they posed any imminent threat that justified using lethal force against them. The reason for their presence at the site remains unclear.

On Tuesday 18 September, Israeli soldiers shot and killed two other Palestinian men in the Gaza Strip. Gaza’s health ministry identified the men as Mohammad Ahmad Abu Naji, 34, and Ahmad Mohammad Muhsin Omar, 20. They were participating in the ongoing protests against Israel’s blockade of the Gaza Strip and in support of the right of Palestinian refugees to return to their homes, known as the “Great March of Return”, which began in March 2018. Israeli forces shot the two men in the chest with live bullets despite them not posing any immediate or serious threat.

Since 30 March, more than 180 Palestinians, including at least 29 children, have been killed and over 17,000 others injured in the Israeli military response to the “Great March of Return” protests held along the Israel-Gaza fence. Amnesty International has not documented any instances where protesters posed an imminent threat to the lives of Israeli soldiers and snipers, who have been located behind the fence, protected by military equipment, sand hills, drones and military vehicles.

Also on Tuesday, another Palestinian, Mohammed al-Khatib al-Rimawi, 24, died after he was brutally beaten by Israeli forces as they were arresting him at his home in the village of Beit Rima in the West Bank district of Ramallah.

His family told Amnesty International that around 40 Israeli soldiers arrived in a civilian minibus and that 15 of them burst into the family home in a pre-dawn raid on Tuesday, assaulting Mohammad while he was still lying in bed. The Israeli forces severely beat Mohammad and carried him away while unconscious. The family was informed of his death a few hours later, at around 9am, through a phone call from the Palestinian authorities. An autopsy is expected to take place on Thursday 20 September in presence of the victim’s lawyers.

On the same day, another young Palestinian man, Mohammed Yousef Sha’aban Elayyan, 26, from Qalandia refugee camp near Jerusalem, was shot dead by Israeli police near the Damascus Gate of the Old City in East Jerusalem. Israeli police alleged that the shooting occurred to prevent a stabbing attempt on the start of the Jewish fasting day of Yom Kippur. No Israelis were reported injured in the incident.

Israeli police issued a statement saying the Palestinian man ran towards a Jewish man near Jerusalem’s Old City and knocked him to the ground, then ran away while waving a sharp object at officers who opened fire on him.

Israeli police released security camera footage that they said showed the incident from multiple angles, including images of Mohammed moving towards the Israeli forces with a sharp object before he was shot dead. It is not clear that the Israeli forces had no choice but to use lethal force.  

“Israel has a duty to immediately launch an independent, thorough and transparent investigation into each of these incidents and all other incidents which may involve the use of unnecessary or excessive force, torture and other ill-treatment against Palestinian civilians. We call on the Israeli authorities to hold those found responsible for these grave violations to account through fair trials. Until this happens we will not see an end to Israeli forces’ random and apparently senseless killing and violence,” said Saleh Higazi.

“The international community must also take concrete steps to stop the delivery and trade of arms and military equipment to Israel. A failure to do so fuels serious human rights violations against millions of men, women and children suffering the consequences of 50 years of military occupation, including 11 years of blockade in the Gaza strip.”