ACLU Attorney Asks, “How Much Liberty Should We Give Up?" [Answer: As Much as Your Belief in the Religion of Almighty Government will Allow]

“Perhaps most telling is that if you suggest to the average person that maybe God does not exist, he will likely respond with less emotion and hostility than if you bring up the idea of life without “government.” - LARKEN ROSE

An ACLU Attorney writes “To save lives, all but eight states have already imposed aggressive measures almost never utilized outside wartime. As the death toll climbs, more severe measures may be on the way. Several prominent voices have now advocated imposition of a nationwide lockdown. A noted progressive legal academic even suggested such measures should be immune from judicial oversight. And the Justice Department has proposed that Congress grant it draconian emergency powers.

While the coronavirus is no doubt frightening, so too is massive state power wielded in the name of emergency. I recently felt that power in a very real way, because when the coronavirus pandemic arose I was on sabbatical in Sri Lanka with my family (including my father, a physician). The government there responded by imposing a military curfew, which we lived under for a week before we managed to get out. Authorities arrested several thousand people simply for leaving their homes. Bunkered down in our rented house, we worried about whether we had enough food to last until the curfew lifted. On the afternoon we returned to California I went for a walk with my family — without fearing arrest — for the first time in days. I have never felt the difference between life here and there so viscerally.

In this country we are taught to pause when asked to trade liberty for security. So we should take a moment to analyze the legal constraints governing potential lockdown proposals inside the United States. Could the federal government or a state impose a Sri Lankan-style lockdown to stop the pandemic? Could the courts be excluded from overseeing such emergency action?

Constitutional law provides substantial guidance for understanding the government’s authority to respond to the pandemic. While court cases involving quarantines to control infectious disease are (thankfully) sparse, “lockdown” in its various forms is a species of preventive detention: a restriction on physical liberty without a finding of guilt after criminal trial. Although the Supreme Court has stated that “in our society liberty is the norm, and detention … without trial is the carefully limited exception,” our constitutional system has long recognized several forms of preventive detention as lawful. Most relevant here, the state may preventively detain individuals who have a serious mental disorder and present a danger to themselves or others.

In general, any exercise of preventive detention authority raises three basic constitutional questions. First, does the state have substantive authority in this context to detain without a criminal trial? Second, is the state’s exercise of that authority reasonable in relation to its purpose – i.e., are the length and conditions of confinement necessary to address the harm at issue? Third, has the state provided adequate procedures to ensure the criteria for exercise of that authority are met for the particular individual(s) involved?

Substantive Authority

Governmental authorities in this country — whether federal or state — almost certainly have authority to preventively detain people to protect public health. One might argue the government should not have power to lockdown people who have done nothing wrong. But the fact that individuals facing lockdown have committed no act that could be criminalized actually strengthens the argument for detention without trial in this context. As with individuals whose insanity makes them dangerous, because the danger here does not arise from any voluntary conduct, the criminal justice system has limited power to address the threat to public safety. The handful of modern cases about quarantine thus recognize the government’s power to detain people with deadly infectious diseases in the name of public safety.” [MORE]

All three questions cited above will be decided by the government [the court is also the government] for the government. Any so-called subjective interest balancing by the court and government lawyers in the name of the public good will rarely yield to individual rights. Observe that there is no real limit to government authority exercised in the name of the public good. This is the essence of the lawless society that is rarely visible to the obedient citizenry - law is upheld and deified over humanity. FUNKTIONARY defines the “public good” as a Corporate Statist anti-concept – being the altar on which feudal-citizen-victims are immolated.” Dr. Blynd set forth the following:

Tyranny Law #1 - Any power that can be abused will be abused.

Tyranny Law #2 - Abuse always expands to fill the limits of resistance to it.

Tyranny Law #3 - If people don't resist the abuses of others, they will have no one to resist the abuses of themselves, and tyranny will prevail. [MORE]

In reality “Government” and “authority” do not exist but our belief in them is real.

Larken Rose explains, “the belief in “authority,” which includes all belief in “government,” is irrational and self-contradictory; it is contrary to civilization and morality, and constitutes the most dangerous, destructive superstition that has ever existed. Rather than being a force for order and justice, the belief in “authority” is the arch-enemy of humanity.” He states “the primary danger posed by the myth of “authority” is to be found not in the minds of the controllers in “government” but in the minds of those being controlled, One nasty individual who loves to dominate others is a trivial threat to humanity unless a lot of other people [believe] such domination as legitimate because it is achieved via the “laws” of “government.”

Rose defines “Authority” as the supposed moral right to forcibly control others. Allegedly governmental authority comes from the people. But people cannot delegate rights they do not possess to the government. How can you give something you don’t have? You don’t have the right to initiate unprovoked acts of force against other people - so how can you delegate or authorize anyone else to do such things? This makes it impossible for anyone to acquire the right to rule (”authority”).

The type of government system really just determines how much authority is used to control the people. How much authority actually applied by a government depends upon how much a particular people are willing to [coercively consent] to.

According to FUNKTIONARY, "Government" is Latinized Greek ("Gubematlo" = control; and from the Latin "menre" = mind; it means "The control of the mind." 2) an abstraction (hoax) created for the sole purpose of making theft respectable and mind-control acceptable.

"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." [MORE]

FUNKTIONARY explains there are no tyrants; only tyranny exists. How can one man or woman rule a multitude against their will except through mind-control and word-conditioning control? "Find out the exact amount of injustice any people accept, and you will find out the exact amount of injustice they receive." FUNKTIONARY states, “tyranny must have an accomplice. The perpetrator by intent must be accommodated by the perpetrator by consent. The former initiates, the latter accommodates.” “We get the government we deserve.”

The real threat to "authority" is the masses overcoming info-gaps and verigaps through self-knowledge and the proliferation of symbols of opposition, not crime or destruction of property. [MORE]

Dr. Blynd explains "Government" has replaced religion as the opiate of the masses using the Media as its subduing gasses (fumes of subterfuge). During an “emergency” the government especially lathers itself up in power and “turns public fear to its own advantage.” Larken Rose states:

The Religion of “Government”

“Government” is neither a scientific concept nor a rational sociological construct; nor is it a logical, practical method of human organization and cooperation. The belief in “government” is not based on reason; it is based on faith, In truth, the belief in “government” is a religion, made up of a set of dogmatic teachings, irrational doctrines which fly in the face of both evidence and logic, and which are methodically memorized and repeated by the faithful. Like other religions, the gospel of “government” describes a superhuman, supernatural entity, above mere mortals, which issues commandments to the peasantry, for whom unquestioning obedience is a moral imperative, Disobeying to the commandments (“breaking the law”) is viewed as a sin, and the faithful delight in the punishment of the infidels and sinners (“criminals”), while at the same time taking great pride in their own loyalty and humble subservience to their god (as “law-abiding taxpayers”). And while the mortals may humbly beg their lord for favors, and for permission to do certain things, it is considered blasphemous and outrageous for one of the lowly peasants to imagine himself to be fit to decide which of the “government” god’s “laws” he should follow and which it is okay for him to ignore. Their mantra is, “You can work to try to change the law, but as long as it’s the law, we all have to follow it!”

The religious nature of the belief in “authority” is put on display for all to see whenever people solemnly stand, with their hands upon their hearts, and religiously proclaim their undying faith in, and loyalty to, a flag and a “government” (the “republic”). It rarely occurs to those who recite the Pledge of Allegiance, while feeling deep pride, that what they are actually doing is swearing allegiance to a system of subjugation and authoritarian control. In short, they are promising to do as they are told, and behave as loyal subjects to their masters. Aside from the patently inaccurate phrase at the end about “liberty and justice for ail,” the entire Pledge is about subservience to the “government” which claims to represent the collective, as if that in itself is some great and noble goal, The Pledge, and the mentality and emotions it is intended to stir up, would apply equally well to any tyrannical regime in history. It is a promise to be obedient and easily controlled, to subordinate oneself to “the republic,” rather than a promise to do the right thing, Many other patriotic rituals and songs, as well as the overtly religious reverence given to two pieces of parchment – the Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution – also demonstrate that people do not merely view “government” as a practical necessity: they view it as a god, to be praised and worshiped, honored and obeyed.

The main factor distinguishing the belief in “government” from other religions today is that people actually believe in the god called “government,” The other gods people claim to believe in, and the churches they attend, are now, by comparison, little more than empty rituals and half-heartedly parroted superstitions. When it comes to their everyday lives, the god that people actually pray to, to save them from misfortune, to smite their enemies, and to shower them with blessings, is “government.” It is “government” whose commandments the people most often respect and obey, Whenever a conflict arises between “government” and the teachings of the lesser gods – such as “pay your fair share” (taxation) versus “Thou shalt not steal,” or “duty to country” (military service) versus “Thou shalt not murder”– the commands of “government” supersede all the teachings of the other religions. Politicians, the high priests of the church of “government”– the mouthpieces and representatives of “government,” who deliver the sacred “law” from on high – even openly declare that it is permissible for the people to practice whatever religion they wish, as long as they do not run afoul of the supreme religion by disobeying “the law”– meaning the dictates of the god called “government.”

Perhaps most telling is that if you suggest to the average person that maybe God does not exist, he will likely respond with less emotion and hostility than if you bring up the idea of life without “government.” This indicates which religion people are more deeply emotionally attached to, and which religion they actually believe in more firmly. In fact, they believe so deeply in “government” that they do not even recognize it as being a belief at all. The reason so many people respond to the idea of a stateless society (”anarchy”) with insults, apocalyptic predictions and emotional tantrums, rather than with calm reasoning, is because their belief in “government” is not the result of careful, rational consideration of evidence and logic. It is, in every way, a religious faith, believed only because of prolonged indoctrination. And there is almost nothing which state- worshipers find more existentially terrifying than contemplating the possibility that “government” – their savior and protector, teacher and master – does not actually exist, and never did.

Many political rituals have overtly religious overtones to them. The grandiose, cathedral- like buildings, the pomp and circumstance at inaugurations and other “government” ceremonies, the traditional costumes and age-old rituals, the way the members of the ruling class are treated and described (e.g., “honorable”), all give such proceedings an air of holiness and reverence, far more indicative of religious rites than of a practical means of collective organization.

It might be nice to have some morally superior, all-powerful deity to protect the innocent and to prevent injustice. And that is what statists hope “government” will be: a wise, unbiased, all-knowing and all-powerful “final decider” that will override and supersede the flawed, shortsighted and selfish whims of man, unerringly dispensing justice and fairness. However, there is no such thing, and can be no such thing, and there are many reasons why it is utterly foolish to look to “government” as the solution to human imperfection. For example, what almost every statist wants is for “government” to enforce objective rules of civilized behavior, More specifically each individual wants his own perception of justice and morality to be enforced by “authority,” while failing to realize that the moment there is an “authority,” it is no longer up to that individual to decide what counts as moral or just – the “authority” will claim the right to do that for him. And so, over and over again, believers in “authority” have tried to create an all- powerful force for good by anointing some people as rulers, only to quickly learn that once the master is on the throne, he does not care what his slaves were hoping he would do with the power they gave him.

And this has happened to all kinds of statists, with very different beliefs and agendas. Socialists assert that “government” is needed to “fairly” redistribute wealth; Objectivists assert that “government” is needed to protect individual rights; Constitutionalists assert that a “government” is needed to carry out only those tasks listed in the Constitution; believers in democracy assert that “government” is needed to carry out the will of the majority; many Christians assert that “government” is needed to enforce God’s laws; and so on. And in every case the people end up disappointed, because the “authority” always changes the plan in order to serve the interests of the people in power. Once a set of rulers are “in charge,” what the masses had intended for them to do with their power does not matter. This fact has been demonstrated by every “government” in history, Once the people create a master, tie people, by definition, are no longer in charge.

To expect otherwise, even without all of the historical examples, is absurd. To expert the master to serve the slave – to expect power to be used solely for the benefit of the one being controlled, not the one in control – is ridiculous. What makes it even more insane is that statists claim that appointing rulers is the only way to overcome the imperfections and untrustworthiness of man. Statists look out at a world full of strangers who have questionable motives and dubious morality, and they are afraid of what some of those people might do. That, in and of itself, is a perfectly reasonable concern. But then, as protection against what some of those people might do, the statists advocate giving some of those same people of questionable virtue a huge amount of power, and societal permission to rule over everyone else, in the vain hope that, by some miracle, those people will happen to decide to use their newfound power only for good. In other words, the statist looks at his fellow man and thinks, “I do not trust you to be my neighbor, but I do trust you to be my master.”

Bizarrely, almost every statist admits that politicians are more dishonest, corrupt, conniving and selfish than most people, but still insists that civilization can exist only if those particularly untrustworthy people are given both the power and the right to forcibly control everyone else. Believers in “government” truly believe that the only thing that can keep them safe from the flaws of human nature is taking some of those flawed humans – some of the most flawed, in fact – and appointing them as gods, with the right to dominate all of mankind, in the absurd hope that, if given such tremendous power, such people will use it only for good, And the fact that that has never happened in the history of the world does not stop statists from insisting that it “needs” to happen to ensure peaceful civilization.

(Author’s personal note; I say all of this as a former devout statist, who for most of my life not only accepted the self-contradictions and delusional rationalizations underlying the myth of “government,” but vehemently spread the mythology myself. I did not escape my own authoritarian indoctrination quickly or comfortably, but let go of the superstition slowly and reluctantly, with much intellectual “kicking and screaming” along the way. I mention this only so that it may be understood that when I refer to the belief in “authority” as utterly irrational and insane, I am attacking my own prior beliefs as much as anyone else’s. -Larken Rose)

Another way to look at it is that statists worry that different people have different beliefs, different viewpoints, different standards of morality. They express concerns such as “What if there is no government and someone thinks it’s okay to kill me and steal my stuff?” Yes, if there are conflicting views – as there always have been and always will be – they can lead to conflict, The authoritarian “solution” is that, instead of everyone deciding for himself what is right and what he should do, there should be a central “authority” that will make one set of rules that will be enforced on everyone. Statists obviously hope that the “authority” will issue and enforce the right rules, but they never explain how or why this would happen. Since the edicts of “government” are written by mere human beings – usually exceptionally power-hungry, corrupt human beings – why should anyone expect their “rules” to be better than the “rules” each individual would choose for himself?

The belief in “government” does not make everyone agree; it only creates an opportunity to drastically escalate personal disagreements into large-scale wars and mass oppression. Nor does having an “authority” settling a dispute do anything to guarantee that the “right” side wins. Yet statists talk as if “government” will be fair, reasonable, and rational in situations where individuals would not be. Again, this demonstrates that believers in “government” imagine “authority” to have superhuman virtues that should be trusted above the virtues of mere mortals. History shows otherwise, A twisted sense of morality in one person, or a few, can result in the murder of one person, or even dozens, but that same twisted sense of morality in just a few people, when they get hold of the machine called “government,” can result in the murder of millions. The statist wants his idea of the “good rules” forced on everyone by a central “authority,” but has no way to make that happen and no reason to expect that it will happen. In their search for an all-powerful “good guy” to save the day, statists always end up creating all-powerful bad guys. Over and over again, they build giant, unstoppable “government” monsters in the hope that they will defend the innocent, only to find that the monsters become a far greater threat to the innocent than the threats they were created to protect against.

Ironically, what statists actually advocate in their attempts to guarantee jus ice for all is the legitimization of evil. The truth is that all the belief in “authority” ever does, and all it ever can do, is to introduce more immoral violence into society. This is not an unfortunate coincidence, or the side effect of a basically good idea. It is a truism based upon the nature of the belief in “authority,” and this is easy to logically prove. [MORE]

Movement Restrictions Spur Various Lawsuits. Despite All Evidence to the Contrary, Legal Advocates Still Insist We Have “Constitutional Rights" & ‘Government Exists to Serve Us’

WHERE WERE THE RIGHTS IN PHILLY LAST WEEK? - Wear a Mask or Get Dragged Off the Bus: A Gang of White Philadelphia Cops Violently Assault Black Man to En-Force Compliance with Virus Law in System of Coercive Authority [Demockery]. “Government is simply, unequivocally , and always initiation of force or coercion and nothing else." [MORE]

Rights are myths—obedience to servitude or jail is the reality. From [HERE] Last week, Kentucky Governor Andy Beshear signed an executive order that prohibits Kentuckians from crossing state lines, save for a limited number of exceptions, including employment, trips for necessary supplies or to seek medical care.

While the Democrat and neighboring Ohio Governor Mike DeWine, a Republican, have been lauded by political allies and opponents alike for their decisive action in response to the Covid-19 outbreak, the interstate travel ban marked a decisive shift in tactics.

More than the reiteration of guidelines for social distancing or closure of nonessential businesses, Beshear’s executive order subjects violators to possible criminal prosecution, and also requires residents currently located in another state to submit to a 14-day quarantine upon their return to the Bluegrass State.

Civil litigation followed on the heels of Beshear’s order. Kentucky resident Allison S. Alessandro – located immediately across the Ohio River from Cincinnati in Campbell County, Kentucky — sued the governor and Secretary of State Daniel Cameron three days later.

Alessandro argues the order violates her 14th Amendment rights and has prevented her from traveling to Ohio to visit friends and family, and has also deprived her of the use of Hamilton County, Ohio’s public parks.

Attorney Brian O’Connor, with the Cincinnati-based firm Santen & Hughes, denied a request to interview his client but gave his thoughts about the suit via email.

“I think our papers clearly show that the travel ban is unconstitutional,” O’Connor said, “and I’m confident the federal court will agree. Given the current state of affairs in our country, I sadly expect that we’re going to see a wave of constitutional cases like this across the country.”

The attorney continued, “Just this morning, I read a story in the Washington Post about police in New Jersey forcibly stopping an orthodox rabbi’s funeral and arresting people at the religious service.”

O’Connor said elected officials are continuing “to test the boundary between their authority and individual rights” during the coronavirus pandemic.

“And I feel strongly that constitutional lawyers like my partner Lou Sirkin and me have a duty to hold them accountable when they overstep,” he said.

O’Connor’s prediction of lawsuits stemming from travel bans seems well-founded, as Courthouse News has already reported on several similar cases across the country.

In Greensboro, North Carolina, a group of anti-abortion advocates who routinely stand and pray outside an abortion clinic filed a federal lawsuit against Mayor Nancy Vaughan and the Greensboro Police Department after several protesters were arrested and cited for violating a stay-at-home order.

Four Mocksville, North Carolina, residents claim the city continues to violate their First Amendment rights by refusing to allow them to congregate outside the clinic, even though the Greensboro order includes an exception for outdoor activities that comply with social distancing guidelines. [MORE]

FUNKTIONARY makes it plain:

"rights" - useful fictions declared in order to make agents of another type of fiction ("government") have to play along in their deadly theatrical (tragicomedy) game. 2) mere fictions, the contemplation of which leads only to a progressive social, personal, racial and jurisprudential separation from reality. Discussion and debates about "rights" merely evades the FAQ, i.e., the frequently avoided question of who is to enforce any "right" and who will benefit from the pretense. [MORE]

rights - fantasmatic or fictitious objects having no reality in actuality by those imagining as an identity being in possession of them. Rights are cultural gratuities perceived through various fantasy frames, recognized, and sometimes even created, by man's system of law to provide a modicum or pretense of civility under a system whereby their very undermining and violation is vouchsafed. Rights are merely rites unless you know how to assert and defend them in order to enjoy them. 2) things people are free to do whether they are able to or not. 3) conditions of existence required by hue-man's nature for their potential survival (primarily against the cartoon that kills, i.e., the wholly unconscionable entity called the "State"). It is a mistaken notion that rights are enjoyed by one at the expense of the many—that is the realm of privilege. Enjoyment of rights in a neo-imperialistic world controlled by Yurugu through the Greater System (Symbolic Order), paradoxically, entails not only a recognition of their inevitability but, equally, their impossibility. How can we be endowed with rights, or even know what rights are when they are based on binary considerations? Rights, as ontological ephemera, cannot be universally observed, recognized, realized or, enforced—and paradoxically, act also as its own eternal source for its assertion and vessel for its fulfillment in our imaginary enjoyment of them. While the law reads rights referentially, what is universally needed in the praxis of rights discourse today is a particular re-inscription, demystification or reontologising of rights (revivified and convivial) by the pan-gendered subject-citizen-decoder—taken symptomatically rather than seriously. Most people rarely experience the cognizance of being property of corporate fictions because as long as you don't violate the rules of society your real status as feudal-property-slave is not involved or revealed. If there is no 'I,' to what and to whom do rights as objects accrue? Those who are confused by suffering (and the subject of same) require a re-onotoligisation of rights through the trajectory of meaning independent of their existence. Rights and even 'lefts' (i.e., what remains after all of our imaginary rights are traced to their inception as figment) for that matter, like good and evil, are human inventions which humans treat as non-human realities. While fantasy frames invent rights, romanticism reinvents them. Enjoy your symptoms and play with your syndrome—the symptom is the solution. Read carefuly the holding in the supreme Court case of U.S. v. Babcock. Rights are myths—obedience to servitude or jail is the reality. (See: Abilities, Bill of Rights, Monoright, Servitude, Fantasy, Jurisdiction, Human Resources, Citizenship, Frankenstein, Autonomy. Rule of Law, Surrogate Power, Indigenous Power, Yurugu, Jouissance, Privilege, Disobedience, Duty & Willpower)

Racist Suspect Judge Finds No Violation of Rights or Deliberate Indifference to CA Inmates (66% Black & Latino), Says There is No Need to Compel a Corrections Plan to Prevent Spread of COVID

Racist suspect federal judge Jon Tigar. Photos below are from [HERE]

From [HERE] A racist suspect federal judge has rejected a call from lawyers representing state prisoners to compel the California corrections department to submit a plan for preventing the novel coronavirus from spreading any further within its 32 prisons.

“This court can only order relief if it first finds the violation of a federal right,” U.S. District Judge Jon Tigar wrote in his ruling Friday, following a Thursday hearing on the state’s progress in separating and transferring prisoners out of packed dormitories. Tigar is a racist suspect [white person]. Of the 160,000 prisoners in California, two-thirds are African-American and Latino. Latino inmates made up 39.8% of the population, African American inmates 28.9%, and white inmates 25.2%, with 6.1% classified as "other. [more]

The California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation now reports 79 confirmed coronavirus cases among inmates in the prison system, 51 at the California Institute for Men in the Southern California city of Chino. There are 83 infected staff statewide.

Tigar said it’s clear the state has not been “deliberately indifferent” to the prisoners’ health and safety, noting its early release of 3,500 inmates and relocation of 1,800 inmates out of dormitory-style housing. Prisoners have also begun to produce hand sanitizer and cloth masks for staff and inmates to use.

“No one questions the magnitude of the challenge that Covid-19 presents in a prison setting, and if the court were in the governor’s or the secretary’s position, it might adopt additional or different measures. But the question before the court is not what it thinks is the best possible solution. Rather, the question is whether defendants’ actions to date are reasonable,” Tigar wrote. “On the record before the court, the answer to that question is yes.”

At Thursday’s hearing, a lawyer for the corrections department told Tigar the prisons have begun to enact a plan to move prisoners into 8-person cohorts, or “pods,” a recommendation made by prison receiver J. Clark Kelso.

“All institutions that have dorm settings have been actively working to identify plans to create 8-person pod sleeping areas in vacant space within our institutions, in line with the receiver’s recommendation,” CDCR spokeswoman Dana Simas said in an email Friday. “California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation and California Correctional Health Care Services have activated a centrally located command center where logistics experts are working diligently to monitor information from the institutions and help procure supplies and coordinate these plans at the institution level.”

Simas said these pods are being set up in both dormitories and gymnasiums.

“Each 8-person pod area is separated by six feet,” she said. “However, based on square footage and layout of the building, some will have 6-person and 8-person pods — always allowing for six feet between next pod. Some pods are separated by six feet and some are separated by half/pony walls to create social distancing.”

Attorney Alison Hardy with the Prison Law Office said she believes the state’s efforts to keep inmates six feet apart has fallen short, given the extreme level of overcrowding in its prisons. Bunkbeds in dormitories are currently spaced 30-40 inches apart.

“We are, of course, disappointed by the ruling,” Hardy said in an email. “Given the state of overcrowding in the dormitories and the magnitude of the danger here, we believe the state’s response has been inadequate, and constitutes deliberate indifference.” 

While the state says family-style cohorts are already being set up, Hardy says she and her colleagues are still in the dark about what they look like.

“We do not know anything about how the 8-person cohort is supposed to be structured, other than it is supposed to have six feet of space in all directions around it,” she said. “This is something that I can envision if they set up cots in prison gymnasiums, but I do not know how they anticipate implementing this in the more traditional dorms, including the California Institution for Men.”

Tigar said he will continue to monitor the state’s response.

“This holding does not mean that the court will cease its efforts to oversee defendants’ response to COVID-19,” he wrote. “The pandemic presents an ongoing public health emergency, and the virus’s presence within the prisons requires continuous, evolving efforts by defendants, as well as ongoing monitoring by the court.”

Another case management conference is scheduled for April 20.

Photo from Inmates’ Emergency Motion for Release Shows Overcrowding at Joshua Hall, California Institution for Gender Annihilation, Family Destruction & the Spread of Diseases

Photo from inmates’ emergency motion for release shows overcrowding at Joshua Hall, California Institution for Men. Motion denied. [MORE] According to FUNKTIONARY:

PRISON - People Residing In State Orchestrated Neverland. Once convicted (wrongfully or accurately) of either non-crimes or real crimes (inflicting actual injury to another) you are no longer treated as just an animal—but less than one.

prisons - U.S. Bureau of Gender Annihilation and Family Destruction. Prisons are indicative of society's sickness, the political repression of the State and a corrupt—if not bankrupt—economic system. There is a myth supported by Corporate media that prisons function to keep criminals away from society. This is patently false as most crimes are non-violent and actually go unreported. Most "criminals" operate and remain within agencies and boardrooms—though not in prison, making life for others a living hell. Prisons are but reflections of society's infractions—refracted in the form of deformed grins and shadowed sins— missing the mark is the mark of the missing and exploited, the lost, oppressed, despised and compromised, left with only vices as their bootstrap devices in a misbegotten world gone astray. A place where the multitudes (have-nots) scrap amongst each other in order to taste the morsel of just another still-bom day that brings the hope unborn aborted in the muffled moans of yesterday. The ghetto groans in the birth of a new dawn accompanied by the same old sirens serenading the pangs of hunger, souls murmur and pre-mumble the pre-amble to be free; free from the oppression of the OCTOCON and its emissaries. I've seen the whites of eyes, clear and teary—hold on my people, don't get weary. We must all leam to discern and honor the sacredness of life—the life you deserve is the one you preserve, and the life you help save may help you save your own. (See: The OCTOCON, Penal Code, DL Brothers, Buck Rodgers Time, BOP & Homo Tiempos)

Today we have a show about COVID-19, specifically how the pandemic is being handled in prisons and detention. This show includes a lot of voices, and we stru...

White Miami Cop Detains Black Doctor who was Loading a Van w/Supplies to go Help the Homeless. Would an apology or better training solve the problem of vast unequal power in a White over Black system?

Despite All Evidence to the Contrary, Dr. Henderson still believes he has “Constitutional Rights” & that an accountable Government Exists to Serve Us. See story above.

Racism White Supremacy - psychopathic degeneracy. 2) "The local and global power system and dynamic, structured and maintained by persons who classify themselves as white, whether consciously or subconsciously determined, which consists of patterns of perception, logic, symbol formation, thought, speech, action and emotional response, as conducted simultaneously in all areas of people activity (economics, education, entertainment, labour, law, politics, religion, sex and war); for the ultimate purpose of white genetic survival and to prevent white genetic annihilation on planet earth—a planet upon which the vast majority of people are classified as non-white (Black, Brown, Red and Yellow) by white skinned people, and all of the nonwhite people are genetically dominant (in terms of skin coloration) compared to the genetic recessive white skin people." -Dr. Francis Cress Welsing, MD. [MORE]

Dr. Bobby wright explained, “Blacks have made and are still making a tragic mistake in basing the worldwide Black liberation movement on moral suasion. It is pathological for Blacks to keep attempting to use moral suasion on a people who have no morality where race is the variable”

Uncle Brother’s Goal is Control Over You thru Illusions: Dependent Media ‘Make-Believe’ that Anyone Unhappy w/“Shelter in Place Orders" [aka “Uncompensated Takings by the Government"] is a "Trump Fan"

“THE SPECTACLE.” social relations mediated by the mass media. Above, totalitarian PATRIOT RACHEL MADDOW INDULGES IN THE LANGUAGE OF totalitarianISM.

In an article with the headline,“Trump Fans Protest Against Governors Who Have Imposed Virus Restrictions“ the NYT reports that President Trump on Friday openly encouraged in what dependent media insist on describing as [and projecting to be] “right-wing protests” of social distancing restrictions in states with stay-at-home orders, a day after announcing guidelines for how the nation’s governors should carry out an orderly reopening of their communities on their own timetables.

In a series of all-caps tweets that started two minutes after a Fox News report on the protesters, the president declared, “LIBERATE MICHIGAN!” and “LIBERATE MINNESOTA!” — two states whose Democratic governors have imposed strict social distancing restrictions. He also lashed out at Virginia, where the state’s Democratic governor and legislature have pushed for strict gun control measures, saying: “LIBERATE VIRGINIA, and save your great 2nd Amendment. It is under siege!”

His stark departure from the more bipartisan tone of his announcement on Thursday night suggested Mr. Trump was ceding any semblance of national leadership on the pandemic, and choosing instead to divide the country by playing to his political base.

Echoed across the internet and on cable television by conservative pundits and ultraright conspiracy theorists, his tweets were a remarkable example of a president egging on demonstrators and helping to stoke an angry fervor that in its anti-government rhetoric was eerily reminiscent of the birth of the Tea Party movement a decade ago. [MORE]

Doggy’s Goal is to Control You [preferably] Thru the Promotion of Illusions. A lawsuit filed recently to challenge shelter in place orders in Pennsylvania explained that although such orders may be necessary they are nevertheless Government seizures of people’s livelihoods and businesses that have forced indefinite closures and widespread layoffs. The suit correctly described the government’s actions as “uncompensated takings” that violate the Takings Clause of the 5th Amendment. That is, the government is legally obligated to properly compensate citizens for their tangible losses - and this does not mean some bullshit $1200 check. The lawsuit says:

The Orders constitute a regulatory taking implemented for a recognized public purpose, and therefore the failure to pay just compensation contravenes the Takings Clause of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments. See Penn Central Transportation Co. v. City of New York, 438 U.S. 104 (1978); Lucas v. S.C. Coastal Council, 505 U.S. 1003 (1992); Horne v. Dep't of Agric., 576 U.S. 350, 135 S. Ct. 2419, 2426 (2015) (“Nothing in the text or history of the Takings Clause, or our precedents, suggests that the rule is any different when it comes to appropriation of personal property. The Government has a categorical duty to pay just compensation when it takes your car, just as when it takes your home.”).

It also states, ‘Without extending constitutionally required just compensation to Plaintiffs and those similarly situated, [shelter in place] Orders jeopardize the sustainability of many businesses and the livelihoods those businesses provide to individuals.’

Doggy or Uncle Brother has an illusion to sell in order gain coerced compliance and control over you. Polarize and politicize [reality] people’s legitimate concerns as right or left. Here, the new tactic is to associate Donald Trump with anyone who supports freedom and the natural right to just compensation for property or labor taken or destroyed. This mindless tactic is similar to Republicans associating the gang MS-13 with anyone who supports the humane treatment of “immigrants” or Democrats associating anyone who supports the right to bear arms with the NRA. This is Maya. FUNKTIONARY calls such talk “the language of totalitarianism.” Trump is an incompetent con-man who watches tv all day in search of more neuropeons to con. Clearly, if Trump wanted people to be compensated for government takings then 82% of the benefits of the tax breaks in the Coronavirus relief bill wouldn’t be going to only 43,000 Americans making over $1 million per year. [MORE] A well documented fact carefully ignored in this context by the dependent media who have another narrative to sell. Trump and dependent media are Doggy’s game show. Uncompensated takings by the government have nothing to do what political party you support.

Here, while intentionally preventing you from working or running a profitable business Uncle Brother simultaneously requires immediate payment [rent, mortgage, insurance, car payments, etc] or accrued debt payments after the govt orders are lifted- to wealthy white elites. Uncle Brother seeks your obedience to said measures without just compensation because compelled compliance is expensive.

According to FUNKTIONARY

totalitarianism - a neologism coined by Mussolini--best understood by the phrase "The Nightmare State," whose agents (neocrats) seek totality of control over its subject-victims ("citizens"), including their erotic emotions and minds. 2) Big Brother's Fantasy State. 3) total impersonalized terror. 4) fascism disguised as democracy. (See: Fascism & Demockcracy)

totalitarian Patriotism - terrified silence created through the suppression of principled cognitive dissent under the First Amendment and the Declaration of Independence. 2) allowing the officers of so-called "government" to become free from the limits of law. Criticism of the federal government's anti-terrorism policies is nothing less than treason."-US Attorney General "Jailin'" John Ashcroft December 6, 2001 remarks at Senate Judiciary Committee. "Either you're with me or you're with the terrorists." -Curious George Custard Dubya Bush. "If you say the government is in a conspiracy to take your freedom away, you're wrong...There's nothing patriotic about hating you're government or pretending you can hate your government but love your country." -Bill 'Slick-Willy-Style' Clinton, (husband of New York Senator Hillary Rob'em Clinton), statements made during 1995 Commencement Address delivered shortly after the inside-job Oklahoma City Bombing. These statements are the language of totalitarianism. Totalitarian Patriotism is a goose step in the wrong direction~ The plot thickens as it sickens! (See: American Protective League, Oklahoma City Bombing, Fascism & Cooperative Federalism)

The Spectacle - a constructed reality; the concrete inversion of life; via the autonomous movement of the apparently non-living. 2) the mirrorization of the noumenon into the phenomenal universe without understanding or overstanding it as such an objectivization in duality. The Spectacle is not a collection of images but a social relation among people mediated by images. The Spectacle is a theoretical construct—a tool for explaining many things about society; how people live vicariously through the dominant images of production, consumption and power relations. It is the thoughtfofms in which people create, contemplate and consume mediated by images of what-life-is, so that they will forget how to live radically for themselves. It is the totality of images and illusions that alienate people from living, its the primary production of modern societies. It is ideology materialized. It is the social relations that are mediated by the mass media; it is what makes people apathetic and reduces them to inactivity. It is what prevents people from realizing what their collective problems are and dissolving them. It is what perpetually absorbs people into activities that prolong their misery. It is the mediated stream of unreality that channels desire-energy against itself, producing a separate world, a pseudo-world apart form one's self-history—from all those powerful institutions of Self-actualization. It is what motivates people to live a pseudo-life in submission to products and machines, basking passively in the acceptance of oppression, to blindly do what is manifestly against their own self-interest, to pollute the land they love and the air they breathe—it is a fundamental sickness of modern societies superimposed over and aided by the "Rolebots" (clones and drones) of Corporate State. It is the mass media and the propaganda from the pure war machine and the military prison industrial police state complex. It is Doggy, the double-bind of not knowing real from unreal, (hypereal) or what you say from what you want. It is the mass objectivization and unholy marriage (union) of the Beasthood with the Syndrome, leaving people fragmented, separated, isolated, alienated, fascinated, pixelated, dilated, intimidated, exasperated, mediated, concatenated, weak, docile, dependent, submissive and uncritical. ''The Spectacle is the ultimate commodity in that it makes all others possible." -Scott Bukatman. "Without the slightest hint of suppression or intolerance, the spectacle ensures that the appearance of real dissent precludes its real appearance." -Sadie Plant. (See: PIC. Commodity, Screen, Maya, Pseudolife, The Passing Show, Rolling Mirror, MEDIA, Materialism, Funktionalize, F-Prime, Meta-Frame, Naive Realism, "Dream," Trance, Emergency, Consumers & Doggy)

Doggy - Uncle Brother—the condition and conditioning which serves you your problem doubling as your very own ambition. 2) a situation such that the fulfillment of the conditions necessary to achieve a desired result produces its failure. 3) the entity that goes by many names, including bank-monopolized capitalism the Spectacle, the Hall of Mirrors and the Looking Glass society, the Mega-machine, Statism, Global Imperialism Scientific Socialism cooperative federalism, corporate religion, and the phallacy of "progress"—the manifestation and embodiment of the tool of the Wallflower Order. 4) any shrewd trickster. 5) Leviathan's Big Brother. 6) the creators of the source code for the global dis-information "system." 7) Dr. Sam and Mr. Brother. 8) the collective name ascribed to inert abstractions that we have given artificial life-support to and unwittingly sanctioned or accorded superiority over life. Doggy is the cultural conditioning system that maintains its hold over all things and all people, even our minds and opinions, by getting us to be informers and informants on each other, by getting us to be the trustees in and of their mind prism prison. Doggy is any and all conditioning, often self-imposed and when necessary involuntarily inflicted, that promotes your belief in illusion (both grand and petit) as a way of life. Doggy creates the conditions wherein an undetected and undeclared war is waged on us directly through us. The result of this on-going psychological war is that you, like many others, willingly destroy your freedom without the possibility of recognizing or overcoming the oppressions of control. The belief in illusion is the agreement to oppression. Doggy is the violent programming we have sustained all of our lives. Doggy wants you to just barely survive—but not to be fully alive—wants you to remain barely alive, but not to fully live. Say Uncle! Bad Doggy. (See: "THEY," Hidalgo, Vampires, Society, Thoughtforms, Crimethlnc., Beasthood, Corporate State, Governments, Uncle Sam Wallflower Order, Cell, The Collective, Fishbowlers, Big Brother & "Greater System")

As Dummy Trump Feigns Solidarity w/Neuropeons Affected by “Shelter in Place Orders," Study Shows 82% of GOP Tax Cuts in Relief Bill go to Wealthy Whites [Neuropeans] Making Over $1M a year

Pass Bucks, Not the Buck

From [HERE] Hidden away in the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act is a series of Republican tax cuts that will save the ultra-wealthy $90 billion in 2020 alone. According to a report from the Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT), a nonpartisan congressional body, almost 82 percent of the benefits of the tax breaks will go to just 43,000 Americans who make over $1 million annually. In contrast, less than three percent will go to the great majority who earn less than $100,000 per year.

The provision, inserted into the emergency bill intended to save the economy from implosion, allows business owners to suspend any limitations on how much they can deduct against their non-business income, such as capital gains tax, in order to further reduce their tax liability, in some cases likely to zero. Unsurprisingly, this business-friendly loophole is destined to aid the extremely wealthy and ultimately hurt the rest. The JCT projects that the tax cut will add almost $170 billion to the deficit over the next ten years, something that Republicans, if history is any judge, will use as a battering ram against any progressive policies tabled.

The Trump administration, which originally brushed off the coronavirus as a liberal “hoax” intended to unseat the president, has of late spared no expense in trying to buoy the fortunes of the rich. Last month, the government injected over $1.5 trillion into the stock market – the equivalent of the entire national student debt – resulting in a 15-minute rally before another fall. Big business has been bailed out to the tune of trillions for the second time in twelve years. Despite the fact that filming has been suspended and its theaters, hotels and amusement parks are deserted, Disney’s share price has been rallying by over 20 percent of late due to the promise of an enormous quarter-trillion dollar bailout for the hotel and leisure industry. Meanwhile, airlines are expecting a similarly generous settlement, leading American Airlines stock to surge 27 percent in the last two weeks, despite the fact that barely anyone is currently using their services.

In contrast, the clear losers of the bailout have been working-class Americans, many of whom will have to wait up to five months for a meager $1,200 check – far less than those in other advanced countries are receiving. Unlike for the aviation industry, there has been no moratorium on rent for ordinary Americans, many of whom are risking their lives daily for low wages in jobs now deemed “critical” to the survival of society. Across the United States, breadlines form outside food banks as tens of millions of poor, furloughed or laid off Americans struggle to afford basic sustenance.

Many small business owners are not faring much better. Indeed, one economic consequence of the pandemic might be that large corporations, more able to influence government policy, are saved while smaller ones go under, accelerating the transition of the country into a corporate state. [MORE]

Pennsylvania Authorities Agree to End Permanent Solitary Confinement of Death-row Inmates [53% Black], Body Cavity Searches and 24-hour Illumination of their Cells

From [HERE] A federal district court judge has approved a settlement of a class action challenge to the conditions of confinement on Pennsylvania’s death row that officially ends the state’s policy of mandatory incarceration of death-row prisoners in permanent solitary confinement. 

The court approval comes nearly five months after the Department of Corrections agreed to a tentative change to the conditions of incarceration. In a 14-page Memorandum and Order, Judge John E. Jones III of the United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania called the former conditions “draconian” and expressed “absolutely no hesitancy” in accepting the proposed agreement, which he said “effectuates a sweeping alteration of the class members’ conditions of confinement.”

“The death penalty is a degrading proof of man’s inhumanity to man. It shows that man is still living in the barbarous age. Civilization still remains an idea – it has not become a reality.” The DATA ABOVE IS FROM DPIC.

The settlement agreement, reached in November 2019, provides death-row prisoners with at least 42.5 hours a week out of their cells and 15 minutes of phone access each day and allows prisoners to have contact visits, outdoor exercise, daily showers, group religious services, jobs, and access to educational programs. It also ends the Commonwealth’s practices of subjecting death-row prisoners to body cavity searches whenever they leave their cells and requiring 24-hour illumination of the prisoners’ cells. Pennsylvania had already begun implementing some of the terms of the agreement in anticipation of its approval.

Prior to the settlement, prisoners on death row were kept alone in their 8-by-12-foot cells for 22 hours on weekdays and all day on weekends, and they were denied human contact with family members and direct access to their lawyers during visits. They also were not eligible for jobs or educational opportunities. The settlement also includes a provision to provide “resocialization assistance” for those who endured solitary confinement.

Several other states have recently taken similar steps to improve the conditions of confinement for prisoners on death row. In May 2019, a federal appeals court in Virginia ruled that the Commonwealth’s former policy of 23- or 24-hour per day solitary confinement of death-row prisoners constituted cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the Eighth Amendment. Two months later, in the midst of a federal lawsuit challenging its death-row conditions, South Carolina ended its practice of housing death-row prisoners in as much as 23-hour per day solitary confinement in windowless cells the size of a parking space. In September 2019, Oklahoma ended its policy of housing its death-row prisoners in solitary confinement in an underground facility that civil rights groups had called “inhumane and oppressive.” The groups had threatened legal action if the state did not institute reforms. 

Decades of research show that solitary confinement, like that experienced by death row prisoners, is deeply detrimental to mental health, and international human rights groups have likened it to torture.

If Citizens Have No Right to Grab & Detain an 8 Yr Old Black Boy for Selling Candy on the Subway Then Where Did NYPD Cops Get their Authority to do so?

From [HERE] Police officers in a Harlem subway station on Friday night were seen forcibly dragging a child away from a woman claiming to be his mother, apparently for the offense of selling snacks on the train.

Witness Shaquan Jenkins tells Gothamist he was on his way home to Jersey City when he saw police remove the unidentified boy from the train at the 145th Street station.

Jenkins said he had seen the boy moving through the subway car selling candy shortly before police officers grabbed him. He says a woman who identified herself as the boy's mother repeatedly told police "that's my son."

One video shared by Jenkins on Twitter showed the distraught boy struggling with police officers as subway riders angrily object.

"We're gonna let your son go when you speak to me," one officer, who is not wearing a protective mask, tells the woman who identified herself as the boy's mother.

"I'm speaking to you now!" the woman replies.

"You're not speaking to me," the officer says to the woman.

Jenkins said that bystanders were trying to help by gathering the candy the boy had dropped on the subway platform, but that police threw it in the garbage.

"They looked like kidnappers, like they were trying to kidnap the little boy," Jenkins said. "I felt outraged. It’s a little boy. Can’t they talk to him on his level and say it’s not safe, go home? Why did they need three officers to take him to the precinct?"

A second video shows more officers joining the others to bring the boy up the subway stairs. Some of the officers can be seen wearing protective surgical masks, others are not.

"He’s crying, as they try to close the train doors, they called down extra police officers," Jenkins said. "It looked like they trampled him in a pile."

The NYPD Transit Police maintains a precinct in the station, and Jenkins says he followed the officers as they brought the boy there.

It's unclear if the boy was further detained in the precinct. The NYPD did not immediately respond to inquiries about the incident. [MORE]

It’s also unclear where the NYPD cops’ authority comes from. No citizen has the right to initiate an unprovoked act of violence against another person.

Question here: can you delegate a right to someone that you don’t have? where does authority, the right to rule others, come from? Asked differently, you don’t have the right to initiate unprovoked acts of force against other people - so how can you delegate or authorize another person to do such things? How did police acquire such super-human powers?

Undeceiver Larken Rose states, “Despite all of the complex rituals and convoluted rationalizations, all modern belief in “government” rests on the notion that mere mortals can, through certain political procedures, bestow upon some people various rights which none of the people possessed to begin with. The inherent lunacy of such a notion should be obvious. There is no ritual or document through which any group of people can delegate to someone else a right which no one in the group possesses, And that self-evident truth, all by itself, demolishes any possibility of legitimate “government.

The average person believes that “government” has the right to do numerous things that the average individual does not have the right to do on his own. The obvious question then is, How, and from whom, did those in “government” acquire such rights? How, for example – whether you call it “theft” or “taxation”– would those in “government” acquire the right to forcibly take property from those who haw earned it? No voter has such a right. So how could voters possibly have given such a right to politicians? All modern statism is based entirely on the assumption that people can delegate rights they don’t have.” [MORE]

Paying the Cost to be Servants: Lawsuit says Shelter in Place Orders Causing Lost Income and Business are "Uncompensated Takings" by the Government that Violate the 5th Amendment

From [HERE] Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Wolf’s order closing all “non-life-sustaining” businesses as a means to combat the spread of the coronavirus constitutes an uncompensated taking in violation of the Fifth Amendment, a federal class action lawsuit has claimed. The complaint states:

‘The Governor and the Secretary have seized without compensation the property of businesses and the livelihoods of individuals across the Commonwealth, forcing indefinite closures and widespread layoffs. These uncompensated seizures violate the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment, made applicable to States through the Fourteenth Amendment, and also violate well-established notions of Substantive and Procedural Due Process. Plaintiffs respectfully request that this Court (i) declare the Governor’s actions unconstitutional, and (ii) order the payment of just compensation.

The Governor and Secretary issued a series of Executive Orders on March 19 and March 20, 2020 (“COVID-19 Closure Orders” or “Orders”), for the public purpose of protecting Pennsylvania’s public health, safety and welfare. The Governor has placed the cost of these Orders – issued for the benefit of the public – squarely upon the shoulders of private individuals and their families, and has failed to justly compensate affected parties for these takings undertaken for their benefit to the public. Without extending constitutionally required just compensation to Plaintiffs and those similarly situated, these Orders jeopardize the sustainability of many Pennsylvania businesses and the livelihoods those businesses provide to individuals. In support of this demand for relief, Plaintiffs state as.

It also explains, “The Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment provides that private property shall not “be taken for public use, without just compensation.” U.S. CONST. AMEND. V. 101.

The Takings Clause “is designed not to limit the governmental interference withproperty rights per se, but rather to secure compensation in the event of otherwise proper interference amounting to a taking.” Lingle v. Chevron U.S.A. Inc., 544 U.S. 528, 536–37 (2005)(quoting First English Evangelical Lutheran Church of Glendale v. County of Los Angeles, 482U.S. 304, 315 (1987) (emphasis in original)).

The Takings Clause bars government actors “from forcing some people alone to bear public burdens which, in all fairness and justice, should be borne by the public as a whole.” Armstrong v. United States, 364 U.S. 40, 49 (1960).“ [MORE]

As Trump Offers Living Proof that ‘White Degeneracy has been Wrongly Cast as Supremacy,’ Media Hoaxed Reporters Forget to ask if the Kingdom will Use Force to Drag Disobedient Citizens Back to Work

PLATINUM RULER: In unprecedented move, Treasury orders Trump’s name printed on stimulus checks

From [HERE] Hours after two groups of governors announced that they were forming regional working groups to help plan when it would be safe to ease restrictions and reopen their economies, President Trump asserted in a White House news briefing that the authority to make such decisions rested with him. 

“The president of the United States calls the shots,” Mr. Trump said. “They can’t do anything without the approval of the president of the United States.”

The announcements by the governors, who formed groups on both coasts, came hours after the president wrote on Twitter that such a decision lies with the president, not the states, and before he made the point more forcefully to reporters in Washington.

Asked what provisions of the Constitution gave him the power to override the states if they wanted to remain closed, he said, “Numerous provisions,” without naming any. [MORE]

According to FUNKTIONARY:

media hoaxing - the fine art of hoodwinking and flimflamming mainstream journalists into extensively covering exhaustively researched, culture-jamming conceptual con-artists.

disobedience - thinking for oneself - deciding for oneself what to do and what not to do. 2) the refusal of services of those in power- to deny their alleged authority over you. The Beast allows you to be disobedient or ignorant but not both. Disobedience is the only crime - all others are offshoots. (See: Prometheus, Rights, Thinking, Though & Rebel).

Who Gets Treatment? “Socialist Distancing" & the “Save the Most [white] Lives Principle" Behind Genocidal Triage Guidelines Used by [white] Hospital Administrators to Deal w/Resource Shortages

Public divided over who should get ventilators if they are scarce

PBS asks, “You are a physician on a ward full of COVID-19 patients, and you find yourself faced with a difficult decision: you have two patients who have come in with similar symptoms—shortness of breath, cough, and fever. Both have lungs full of fluid, and both are rapidly deteriorating. Both urgently need ventilators. One is a 56-year-old African American woman, with poorly controlled diabetes. The other is a 56-year-old man, who is white, and has no medical comorbidities. There is only one ventilator. What would you do?

The United States is now approaching an unprecedented level of medical resource scarcity. The projected need for ventilators will far outweigh supply, and there will be critical shortages of ICU beds for COVID-19 infected patients as well as medical personnel, medications, and personal protective equipment (PPE). Peak demand is projected to occur in two weeks in some locations. Some people will be denied care.

A consensus is developing around the save-the-most-lives principle in medical journals and popular press: if we have critical shortages, give the ventilator to the person with less comorbid diseases, the healthier one, the one who will most enjoy their life after recovery. Save as many people as you can, whatever that takes. This is an emergency.

Guidelines are now being created in many regions to address these difficult decisions. These guidelines will assist physicians in deciding who gets access to scarce resources. Hospitals are being told by federal civil rights officials that they will not be allowed to discriminate based on disability status, race, age or religion. They also shouldn’t base the decision on a person’s ability to pay. On the surface, this appears to protect the most vulnerable members of society.

To fully understand implications of the save-the-most-lives principle, however, we need a crash course in distributive justice. Several years ago, I created a series of animated videos about medical resource scarcity that has been used in public health curriculum and resident education modules at Harvard School of Public Health, MIT, and the University of Pennsylvania. These thought experiments were designed in collaboration with Dan Wikler, professor at Harvard School of Public Health, who has also served as staff ethicist at the World Health Organization (WHO).

This series uses the technique of thought experiments—short scenarios aimed at helping someone think through their values without extraneous details. The so-called ‘Trolley Problem’ is perhaps the most famous ethical thought experiment.

ACCORDING TO POLITICO Coronavirus wreaks havoc on GOVERNMENT HOUSING IN NYC. According to FUNKTIONARY:

Socialist distancing – the ever-expanding and increasing disparity between the haves and the have-nots until the Socialist (i.e., monopoly capitalist) Welfare State becomes the Farewell State—farewell to your rights, your family, friends and even your life through Plandemics (Coronavirus), $camdemics (Corporate State turned Surveillance and Nanny State), 5G bio-weaponized eugenics, starvation, vaccinations, civil unrest, genocide and other nefarious LWO (Last World Order) activities that will greatly reduce the world’s population by 2030. (See: Plandemic, $camdemic, Vaccines, Coronavirus, The Farewell State & COVERT-19)

Here is an example of a thought experiment that I present to other physicians: You are tasked to decide where to set up a medical clinic for hypertension, either in a wealthy white suburb or an urban center with a majority black population. The urban population has low literacy, high rates of the uninsured, and higher rates of hypertension. You only have resources to build one clinic, where would you put it?

In this case, many doctors are horrified when they realize the biggest bang for their health care buck – implementing the save the most lives principle – would lead them to building a clinic in the suburbs and leaving the urban population without care. The suburban population would be more adherent to medications, less comorbid disease, and more able to pay for medications in the long run. If this choice would save the most people, why doesn’t it seem right?

I have sat in on WHO ethics deliberations in Geneva to determine guidelines for scarce medical resource allocation, and one would be hard-pressed to find an ethics document whereby all the authors fully agreed on what was written. It is always a compromise. Ethical solutions are always value-laden, and there are always many possible ‘correct answers’.

In contrast to a pure save-the-most-lives approach to resource scarcity, there is also an approach that takes into account the importance of providing resources to the least well-off people — these are people who might actually require more resources to reach the same level of health. A well-known distributive justice philosopher, John Rawls, in his book, A Theory of Justice, points out that it is sometimes ethically justified to give more resources to the least well-off if these resources ‘are to be to the greatest benefit of the least advantaged members of society’.

Returning to our original two patients, if our primary goal is to save the most people, the answer is clear: save the white man without comorbidities. He will be the most likely to survive of these two patients if given the ventilator. We do this when faced with every decision and we have done our best to save the maximum number of people in the population, not discriminating based on race, gender, disability, religion, or ability to pay. [MORE]

"Socialist Distancing" as Defined in FUNKTIONARY

According to FUNKTIONARY:

Socialist distancing – the ever-expanding and increasing disparity between the haves and the have-nots until the Socialist (i.e., monopoly capitalist) Welfare State becomes the Farewell State—farewell to your rights, your family, friends and even your life through Plandemics (Coronavirus), $camdemics (Corporate State turned Surveillance and Nanny State), 5G bio-weaponized eugenics, starvation, vaccinations, civil unrest, genocide and other nefarious LWO (Last World Order) activities that will greatly reduce the world’s population by 2030.  (See: Plandemic, $camdemic, Vaccines, Coronavirus, The Farewell State & COVERT-19) 

DISTURBING PHOTOS SHOW 'BODIES STORED IN A ROOM AT A DETROIT HOSPITAL AND PILED ON TOP OF EACH OTHER IN A MOBILE MORGUE.' AN EMERGENCY ROOM WORKER AT SINAI-GRACE HOSPITAL IN DETROIT SHARED THE SHOCKING IMAGES WITH CNN

WeCopwatch says Retaliatory Prison Authorities @ Rikers are Trying to Kill Ramsey Orta, the Latino man who Filmed NYPD Cops Murder Eric Garner & Revealed that the Grand Jury was All-White

From [INDYBAY] WeCopwatch writes: Our lives changed on July 17, 2014 as images were broadcast across the globe of Staten Island plain clothes officers choking Eric Garner to death. For Ramsey Orta, the young man who filmed the killing, it would start a cycle of state sponsored repression that continues to this very day. Ironically, since White NYPD Cops Murdered Eric Garner — the only person convicted has been Orta.

In 2014, after assembling a grand jury white prosecutors declined to file any charges against the lone officer targeted. At that time Orta revealed the fact that the entire grand jury was white; a fact that the dependent media apparently had intended to omit from history. [Yes, an all white grand jury in NYC, the Blackest city in the US with the largest population of African Americans [MORE] White prosecutors had over 2 million Blacks to choose from and chose none!] Orta said, “when I went to the grand jury to speak on my behalf, nobody in the grand jury was even paying attention to what I had to say,” Orta said. “People were on their phones, people were talking. I feel like they didn't give (Garner) a fair grand jury." A white man he described as a prosecutor “wasn’t even asking no questions about the police officer, he was asking all the questions towards Eric,” Orta said. “What was Eric doing there? Why was Eric there?” "It was all-white." [MORE]

Ramsey was targeted and arrested by NYPD officers on trumped up gun charges and only a few months later was also indicted on multiple drug charges. It didn’t stop there. Ramsey Orta was arrested multiple times after Garner's 2014 death. He was accused in 2014 of stuffing a gun into a 17-year-old girl's pants — a charge he has called "ridiculous" — and accused in 2014 and 2015 of selling drugs to undercover officers, DNAinfo reported.

"There's no chance I'm dumb enough to give a girl a gun out in the open like that," Orta told The Verge. "The cops had been following me every day since Eric died, shining lights in my house every night. You think I'm walking around with a stolen gun that now they say wasn't even loaded?"

Additionally, while locked up on Rikers Island, Ramsey, along with other inmates, was able to document that yes, rat poison had intentionally been put in their food. A profile on Orta in The Verge documented his struggles in prison and belief that the charges against him were retaliatory. He pled guilty to gun and drug charges [apparently all misdemeanors] in 2016 and was sentenced to four years in jail. [MORE] Ramsey is scheduled to be released in July of 2020. Indybay has launched an email campaign for his release.

This [COVID-19] pandemic is not isolated to Rikers Island. It is spreading and it is spreading fast. Ramsey has been in solitary confinement at Midstate Correctional Facility since the outbreak. We are concerned that the NYDOCC will take this opportunity to allow Ramsey to die so they can be done with him once and for all. 

Empowered Dummy Jared Kushner Pushes for a National Coronavirus Surveillance System Allowing Govt Authorities to See why someone visited a Doctor and why they were Admitted to the Hospital

As defined in FUNKTIONARY:

dummy - a wooden puppet or programmed dupe that only speaks when spoken through. 2) one seeming to act independently but in reality controlled by another. -Webster's Dictionary. I know it's hard for most people to imagine themselves as dummies, but the reality of our circumstances painfully underscore this sad fact. How else could it be that for eons, centuries, and even up to this day, that the elite few rule, fool, divide and terrorize the many? If we imagine that we are free, we won't ever suspect or imagine we are dummies.

MassPrivatel asks: When is enough, enough? How many national surveillance systems does America need? President Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner has created a task force that wants to create a real-time national coronavirus surveillance system.

An article in Politico.com revealed how the national coronavirus surveillance system would allow federal authorities to see why someone is visiting their doctor and why they are in the hospital.

"White House senior adviser Jared Kushner’s task force has reached out to a range of health technology companies about creating a national coronavirus surveillance system to give the government a near real-time view of where patients are seeking treatment and for what, and whether hospitals can accommodate them, according to four people with knowledge of the discussions."

Giving government officials unfettered access to patients doctor's visits and what they are being treated for would destroy the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA).

A national coronavirus surveillance network hospital surveillance network would affect American's rights on a scale not-seen since 9/11.

"The prospect of compiling a national database of potentially sensitive health information has prompted concerns about its impact on civil liberties well after the coronavirus threat recedes, with some critics comparing it to the Patriot Act enacted after the 9/11 attacks."

Using COVID-19 as an excuse to monitor hospital emergency rooms is disingenuous at best and misleading at worst.

"It would allow federal officials to continuously track elements like hospitals’ bed availability and the flow of patients into specific emergency rooms across the country — thereby enabling the government to rush resources to parts of the country before they’re hit by a surge of coronavirus cases."

It is hard to put into words how disturbing the White House's plan is. Imagine serving up your entire life's medical history to a government that only seems interested in knowing everything about all of us.

Most kid's are born in hospitals, most kids go to the hospital to receive vaccinations. When someone goes to the hospital for say an injury or a malady they are asked to fill out a medical questionnaire that asks patients to reveal all kinds of personal information that government officials could have access to at their fingertips now because of this proposed  program.

Whether a national coronavirus surveillance system is run by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) only time will tell.

"Some public health experts, meanwhile, suggested that the administration might instead built out and reorient an existing surveillance system housed within the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention that aided the response to prior epidemics. The system, called the National Syndromic Surveillance Program, is a voluntary collaboration between the CDC and various state and local health departments that draws data from more than 4,000 health care facilities."

Politico's summarization of the CDC's the National Syndromic Surveillance Program (NSSP) is slightly misleading.

According to the CDC's "overview" page, the NSSP is much more than a voluntary collaboration of hospitals sharing patient information and more like a secret public surveillance network.

"The NSSP collects, analyzes, and shares electronic patient encounter data received from emergency departments, urgent and ambulatory care centers, inpatient healthcare settings, and laboratories."

The NSSP is the closest thing America has to a secret national patient surveillance network.

Currently, there are "more than 4,000 health care facilities covering 47 states and the District of Columbia that contribute data to the BioSense Platform daily."

The NSSP's BioSense Platform is a cloud-based patient surveillance program that hospitals voluntarily hand over to the Feds. The CDC calls it "a secure integrated electronic health information system that allows them to rapidly collect, evaluate, share, and store syndromic surveillance data."

Creating a national coronavirus surveillance system run by the CDC which has a long history of working with the Department of Homeland Security is a no-brainer for the White House.

Giving DHS the keys to Americans health records at the click of a button is a recipe for disaster. Not only will every hacker in the world try and gain access to them, but it will also open up a new form of public surveillance.

Imagine getting stopped by a police officer who interrogates you at a state border because you had a fever and cough two weeks ago. If you think that could never happen, I encourage you to read my latest story about police doing just that.

As Politico said, creating a real-time national coronavirus surveillance system "would represent a significant expansion of government use of individual patient data, forcing a new reckoning over privacy limits amid a national crisis."

Since 9/11 we have seen numerous public surveillance networks created as an excuse to assuage public fears, but creating another patient surveillance system doesn't make sense and it is not needed. [MORE]

Mass Governor’s Order to Close Gun Stores Ensures that Law Abiding Citizens will be Unable to Defend Themselves Against Criminals & Unaccountable Authorities Lathered Up in Power. Suit Filed

From [HERE] Several gun rights groups filed a lawsuit on Thursday in the US District Court for the District of Massachusetts that challenges the decision of Massachusetts Governor Charles Baker to close all businesses selling firearms and ammunition to the public.

Baker issued COVID-19 Order No. 13 on March 23, which closed the physical workplaces of all businesses and organizations that do not provide essential services. Under the order, firearm and ammunition retailers were not considered essential services.

On March 31 Baker issued COVID-19 Order No. 21, which extended the length of Order No. 13 and revised the list of essential services. Under the category of “Law Enforcement, Public Safety, and First Responders,” workers “supporting the operation of firearm or ammunition product manufacturers, importers, and distributors” were now included. However, firearms dealers were still not considered essential.

In the complaint, the gun rights groups stated that the closure amounts to “a ban on obtaining modern arms for personal defense in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.” Even though the plaintiffs acknowledged that the coronavirus pandemic justified certain changes, they asserted that every emergency has constitutional limits. They alleged that the need for self-defense is “most acute during times of uncertainty and crisis,” so they “need to be able to exercise their fundamental rights to keep and bear arms.” According to the complaint, the order acts “as a perpetual bar” for the acquisition of firearms and ammunition for self-protection.

The plaintiffs are seeking a declaratory judgment that the order violates the Second and Fourth Amendments, as well as an injunction preventing the enforcement of the order.  They also are seeking damages and attorney’s fees.

Citizens Have No Right to Murder so How Can They Delegate That Power to Government? Trump’s Appointed Judges Lift Injunction & Allow Feds to Schedule Executions [murders]

Undeceiver LYSANDER SPOONER EXPLAINED, "‘it is impossible that a government should have any rights, except such as the individuals composing it had previously had, as individuals. They could not delegate to a government any rights which they did not themselves possess. They could not contribute to the government any rights, except such as they themselves possessed as individuals.”

POWER COMES FROM THE PEOPLE & OTHER LIES. From [HERE] A badly divided federal court of appeals has lifted a court order that had prevented the federal government from resuming executions after a hiatus of more than 16 years. 

In a fractured ruling with three separate opinions and no rationale for its decision commanding a majority, a panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit voted 2-1 on April 7, 2020 to vacate the preliminary injunction that had blocked the federal government from carrying out four executions in December 2019 and January 2020. The court remanded the case to the D.C. federal district court to decide a series of additional unresolved issues in the case.

The ruling came in a case in which federal death-row prisoners had filed a multi-pronged challenge to the legality and constitutionality of a new execution protocol issued by the U.S. Department of Justice in July 2019. When the protocol was released, Attorney General William Barr also announced that execution dates had been scheduled for five prisoners. One of those prisoners, who had received a stay of execution on unrelated grounds, did not join the execution challenge.

The court’s per curiam opinion stated “Each member of the panel takes a different view of what the FDPA [Federal Death Penalty Act] requires. Because two of us believe that the district court misconstrued the FDPA, we vacate the preliminary injunction.” The court’s decision divided along partisan lines. Judges Gregory Katsas and Neomi Rao, both appointed by President Donald Trump, voted to vacate the injunction and allow the federal government to schedule executions. Judge David Tatel, appointed by President Bill Clinton, dissented, arguing that the proposed federal protocol violates the FDPA. The panel left the district court to decide the prisoners’ challenges to the proposed execution drugs brought under the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and the Controlled Substances Act, as well as claims related to the constitutionality of the protocol and a claim that the protocol is arbitrary and capricious under the federal Administrative Procedures Act. 

In a statement, Cate Stetson, who argued the case for the prisoners in the circuit court, suggested that the prisoners would seek reconsideration by the full appeals court. “The district court’s injunction was aimed at preventing the government from ‘short-circuiting legitimate judicial process’ and serving the public interest by ‘attempting to ensure that the most serious punishment is imposed lawfully,’” she said. “Without action by the full court, the panel’s splintered decision will allow the government to execute prisoners even while serious questions remain unanswered about the legality of the government’s execution procedures under federal law. As Judge Tatel wrote in his dissenting opinion, ‘Had Congress intended to authorize the Attorney General to adopt a uniform execution protocol, it knew exactly how to do so.’”