Black Gullibility & Anxiety Hit New Highs: Poll says 6 in 10 Blacks Believe the Murder of George Floyd will increase White People’s concern about Racist Cops & Cause Racists to Change

According to a Washington Post-Ipsos poll of black Americans that was conducted as large demonstrations rocked American cities, “black people perceive the country’s police forces as far more racially biased than white people do. More than half of black adults say they or someone they know had an unfair interaction with police in the past few years. More than a third say there was an occasion when they feared being hurt by a police officer — much higher than the shares of white and Hispanic Americans reporting the same experiences.

But black people also largely believe Floyd’s death could be a catalyst for change, in part because people of all colors have participated in protests in hundreds of cities and towns and demanded movement from political leaders, actions several survey respondents cited in follow-up interviews. The survey suggests that the avalanche of revulsion to Floyd’s video-recorded killing — including criticism of the Minneapolis police officers’ actions across the political spectrum and a newfound embrace of the slogan “Black Lives Matter” — has sparked hope among black Americans that the country will address discrimination in ways it did not after past incidents in which police killed black people.

Nearly 6 in 10 black Americans believe Floyd’s killing will increase white Americans’ concern about racial discrimination by police. And a narrow majority think police treatment of black Americans is likely to improve in coming years. [MORE]

“It’s white people’s participation, that’s the difference. They’re the ones who have to see it,” said Dexter Banks, a 46-year-old project manager from Memphis. “We can complain all day long, but if we’re not the majority, there’s not much we can do. They have to have an interest in our problems. As long as they are interested in it, then we have a shot.”

The Post-Ipsos poll shows that most white and Hispanic adults share the view of black Americans that they are treated less fairly than white Americans by police in the United States overall. About half of white Americans say police are generally more likely to use deadly force against black people than white adults, while two-thirds of Hispanics and more than 9 in 10 black Americans say the same.

But opinions splinter along racial lines when respondents were asked about the root causes of those disparities.

Black Americans see a panoply of reasons for mistreatment by police: departments not holding officers accountable for misconduct, police who assume black people are criminals or police who are racist. Three-quarters say white people falsely accusing black people of a crime factors heavily into bad behavior by police, while most also say a lack of community oversight or police training are big contributors.

Among white Americans who say black counterparts are treated less fairly by police, about 8 in 10 say a major reason is lack of accountability for misconduct, while about two-thirds say police assume black Americans are criminals. Smaller majorities blame racist police officers, poor police training and lack of community oversight. Just over 3 in 10 say false accusations by white people are a major reason for unfair treatment.

Despite optimism about rising white concern with police misconduct, 81 percent of black adults say most white Americans don’t understand the level of discrimination black Americans face in everyday life, hardly changed from a Post-Ipsos poll in January. [MORE]

In general, white people treat each other humanely. But in their relations with non-white people, racists function as psychopaths. Dr. Bobby Wright explained, 'the psychopath is an individual who is constantly in conflict with other persons or groups. He is unable to experience guilt, is completely selfish and callous, and has a total disregard for the rights of others. Psychopaths simply ignore the concept of right and wrong. By ignoring this trait in the White race (the lack of ethical and moral development) 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.' [MORE]

This approach also does not seek to neutralize or destroy white supremacy and its vast unequal power differential. Rather it seeks better master-servant relations, or alleviation attempts petitioning racists to “do the right thing.”

Dr. Frances Cress Welsing explained that “the White population on the planet is a tiny minority population, fewer than one-tenth of the people on the planet. They are genetic recessive in terms of skin coloration—meaning, White can be genetically annihilated. White plus Black equals Colored. White plus Brown equals Colored. White plus Yellow equals Colored.

So, the White minority is aware; I would say they have been aware since they circumnavigated the globe, that they were a minority. White males having sexual relations with Non-White women found out that the children all look like the mothers, meaning the White was annihilated.

I say that this is the fundamental motivation of people who classify themselves as White, whether it is conscious and/or subconsciously determined. In other words: what the White Collective is doing on the planet is engaging in behaviors—in economics, education, entertainment, labor, law, politics, religion, sex and more—in order for them to survive on the planet, by any means necessary.” [MORE]

She explained ‘elite racists have worked out a system for White survival, which entails dominating all of the Black, Brown, Red and Yellow people on the planet. Racism is a behavioral system for the survival of White people. I would advise Black people and other people of color that since the practice of racism is the practice of White genetic survival, that the expectation that people who classify themselves as White can change this behavior is a high level expectation. Black people [must] finally understand that White people are playing a White survival game [which] has to inferiorize the functioning of Black and other people of color. [MORE]

Within the system of racism white supremacy Dr. Amos Wilson explains Black people are primarily motivated through created anxiety and other "white instigated social controls." Wilson explains,"to be oppressed is to make how one feels or expects to feel, the measure of all things. To be oppressed is to be ruled through one's feelings and emotions. It is to be exquisitely exposed to and manipulated by a play on one's dreads and fears by one's oppressors; by a play on one's needs for respite from their terror; by a play on one's needs for catharsis, solace, and compensatory joy. Anxiety is the whip in the hand of the oppressor used to drive the oppressed to completion of their appointed rounds.”

He further states, “The history of White-Black social relations has been one of unrelent­ing intimidation, terror, mental and physical abuse of Black peoples, White-on-Black violence; of endemic injustice, and of the unending, unrequited attempts by subordinate Afrikans to avoid, escape, or some way prevent, temper or ameliorate the horrendous aftereffects of these activities. Avoidance and escape from White-instigated anxieties preoccupy the conscious­ness and subconsciousness of oppressed Afrikans. This preoccupation pathologizes, i.e., imbalances, the Afrikan psyche. Consequently, even the "normal" Afrikan under White domina­tion is primarily motivated by the desire to escape — to actively or passively avoid or in some other way neutralize or alleviate the fearful effects of his oppression. By definition, White supremacy requires that Blacks be primarily motivated by anxiety and its avoidance in the interest of their White oppressors.” [MORE]

Turning Public Fear Over COVID to Advantage: An Edelman Study says “Belief" in the Need for Government to Act as a Savior & Public Trust in Dependent Media has Risen

THINGS TO BE FEARED. FUNKTIONARY explains that Government is Latinized Greek ("Gubematlo" = control; and from the Latin "menre" = mind; "The control of the mind." 2) an abstraction (hoax) created for the sole purpose of making theft respectable and mind-control acceptable.“ [MORE] “Next to money, the biggest hoax of them all” [MORE]

From [HERE] Since the start of the year, Americans’ trust in government has risen nine points, while their trust in business has risen by six points. Those are the key findings of the 2020 Edelman Trust Barometer Spring Update: Trust and the COVID-19 Pandemic. Although the study is described as a trust barometer, it only actually refers to belief. The study states:

Since 2011, government had languished in distrust globally, as gridlock in the EU over Greek debt and several corruption scandals in developing nations eroded trust. The Spring Update shows a striking comeback for government: at 65 percent trust (+11 points since January), the public is relying on government to protect them in a manner not seen since World War II. Trust in government is not only up by double digits in six of 11 markets surveyed, it is the only institution trusted by the mass population (62 percent).

During an unprecedented time when government response at all levels could mean the difference between life and death, the public is placing its faith in government to lead the fight against the virus. In fact, respondents want government out front in all areas of the pandemic response: to provide economic relief (86 percent), to get the country back to normal (79 percent), to contain Covid-19 (73 percent), and to inform the public (72 percent).

 Societal Fears

Despite the high trust in government, the pandemic appears to have cast a spotlight on systemic inequity. The 2020 Edelman Trust Barometer in January showed that a growing sense of unfairness in the system was driving distrust across institutions. The Spring Update shows that 67 percent of respondents believe that those with less education, less money and fewer resources are bearing a disproportionate burden of the suffering, risk of illness and need to sacrifice in the pandemic, and more than half are very worried about long-term, Covid-related job loss [losses caused by government shut down or stay in place orders, which were uncompensated takings in violation of the so-called Takings Clause of the 5th Amendment].

Government Rules Over Us and the dependent media is massa’s media. Robert Higgs explains, “By keeping the population in a state of artificially heightened apprehension, the government-cum-media prepares the ground for planting specific measures of taxation, regulation, surveillance, reporting, and other invasions of the people’s wealth, privacy, and freedoms.” [MORE]

A Vital Role for Media and NGOs

The search for reliable information related to the pandemic has driven trust in news sources to an all-time high. Traditional media (+7 points) and owned media (+8) saw the biggest gains. Despite these high levels of trust in news sources, there is an urgent need for credible and unbiased journalism. Concerns about fake news still loom large, with 67 percent of respondents worried about false and inaccurate information being spread about the virus.

There is a strong public demand for expert voices, as people want to hear from the most trusted sources of information on the pandemic: doctors (80 percent), scientists (79 percent) and national health officials (71 percent).

NGOs, which saw a four-point uptick in trust, are nevertheless under pressure to step up: to take care of people who are suffering, to raise money for pandemic relief and to help coordinate local efforts to support the most vulnerable members of our communities. Respondents in seven of the 11 markets surveyed believe their local NGOs are not prepared to deal with the crisis, including Germany, the U.S. and Canada.

Trent Goodbaudy explains: “We are damaged animals, our spirit has been broken, we are domesticated, and we are slaves. We are stuck in an illusory construct that only exists in a in a diseased psyche. There really are no rulers and no masters anyway ; just claims of authority, and acceptance of these claims by the brainwashed. There really is no government other than what you choose to be governed by: they only have the authority that you grant them.”

And perhaps that is Doggy’s major goal of the Trump episode: greater governmental power and control over citizen’s lives and a resurrection of influence by the dependent media.

According to FUNKTIONARY:

Belief- the psychological calm of imagined certitude safely beyond de-stabilizing doubt and troublesome reality-entanglement. 2) a construction of approximate truths, absolute truths, mass truths and primary myths, based on genetic predisposition, and environmental and socio-psychological conditioning. 3) the institutionalization of the unknowable, i.e., a conviction that is not necessarily based upon any empirical, direct-mind or experiential knowledge. 4) a non-physical surviving thought-form. 5) any conclusion based on a fundamental assumption; the evidence of things not seen, no longer actively sought. 6) an intellectual
rationalization surrounded by (based on) "'proofs," reasons and arguments. 7) that which springs out of cultural ideology. 8) the greatest fiction. 9) a trick of the mind to repress doubt. 10) a mental doubt-suppression tactic. A suppressed doubt is neither faith nor even trust. 11) repressed doubt. 12) an explicit or implicit assent to dogmatic propositions (with or without overgrown religious foliage) on someone else's authority. 13) reverential blindness that thwarts fresh perception and intuitive apperception. 14) a prejudice without any experience to support it. 15) a peculiar blend of fatiloquent assertion on one hand and adamant
denial on the other. 16) a manic flirtation with the terminally unprovable. 17) certainty based in the unknown. [MORE]

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. So long as "states"' are viewed and accepted as natural, normal, reality-based and inevitable, they will continue to violently abstract humans into extinction. Statism is mind control; people both unwillingly and willingly surrender their property (labor being one's most inviolable property) to men and women pretending to be "governors,"" "commissioners," and "presidents" etc. because they believe they are "citizens" of a so-called "state" and must pay their proverbial "fair share" to support such abstractions or fictions of law. Just using statism against itself proves bureaucrats never have a case regardless of what they "charge" someone with. "Statism and it's supporting political theology do not exist in people's minds to promote freedom or protect 'Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness:" it's pure mind control to divert our attention away from the actions of anti-social individuals (sociopaths) who are so desperate to "protect" us they are willing to kill us and steal our property." -Marc Stevens. (See: DOME. Beliefs, Landmine Legislation, Scrapitalism, Standing, Subject Matter Jurisdiction. Judicial Victimization, States. Holodeck Court, Allegiance. Anarchy, Society, Civilization, Citizens, Monopoly Capitalism The Golem, Government Paradox, Granfalloons, Corporate State. Government, Servitude. Stalinize, Property, Standing & Monopoly).

In 2010 the Rockefeller Foundation "Outlined" a Global Plandemic that would Kill Millions & Enable Govt to Gain More "Authoritarian Control & Oversight of Citizens & their Activities"

In 2010 in a document entitled, “Scenarios for the Future of Technology and International Development” the Rockefeller Foundation and the Global Business Network released a strategy toolkit based on various scenarios that could affect the world. The scenarios were designed “to explore the many ways in which technology and development could co-evolve—could both push and inhibit each other—in the future, and then to begin to examine what those possible alternative paths may imply for the world’s poor and vulnerable populations. Such an exercise required project participants to push their thinking far beyond the status quo, into uncharted territory.” It further explains, “Each scenario tells a story of how the world, and in particular the developing world, might progress over the next 15 to 20 years, with an emphasis on those elements relating to the use of different technologies and the interaction of these technologies with the lives of the poor and vulnerable.”

The scenario called “Lockstep” discussed a global pandemic affecting millions that required “the mandatory wearing of face masks to body-temperature checks at the entries to communal spaces like train stations and supermarkets.” However, the scenario said it would occur in 2012 and the new influenza strain originated from wild geese.

The document explains:

In 2012, the pandemic that the world had been anticipating for years finally hit. Unlike 2009’s H1N1, this new influenza strain—originating from wild geese—was extremely virulent and deadly. Even the most pandemic-prepared nations were quickly overwhelmed when the virus streaked around the world, infecting nearly 20 percent of the global population and killing 8 million in just seven months, the majority of them healthy young adults. The pandemic also had a deadly effect on economies: international mobility of both people and goods screeched to a halt, debilitating industries like tourism and breaking global supply chains. Even locally, normally bustling shops and office buildings sat empty for months, devoid of both employees and customers.

The pandemic blanketed the planet—though disproportionate numbers died in Africa, Southeast Asia, and Central America, where the virus spread like wildfire in the absence of official containment protocols. But even in developed countries, containment was a challenge. The United States’s initial policy of “strongly discouraging” citizens from flying proved deadly in its leniency, accelerating the spread of the virus not just within the U.S. but across borders. However, a few countries did fare better—China in particular. The Chinese government’s quick imposition and enforcement of mandatory quarantine for all citizens, as well as its instant and near-hermetic sealing off of all borders, saved millions of lives, stopping the spread of the virus far earlier than in other countries and enabling a swifter post- pandemic recovery.

China’s government was not the only one that took extreme measures to protect its citizens from risk and exposure. During the pandemic, national leaders around the world flexed their authority and imposed airtight rules and restrictions, from the mandatory wearing of face masks to body-temperature checks at the entries to communal spaces like train stations and supermarkets. Even after the pandemic faded, this more authoritarian control and oversight of citizens and their activities stuck and even intensified. In order to protect themselves from the spread of increasingly global problems—from pandemics and transnational terrorism to environmental crises and rising poverty—leaders around the world took a firmer grip on power.

At first, the notion of a more controlled world gained wide acceptance and approval. Citizens willingly gave up some of their sovereignty—and their privacy—to more paternalistic states in exchange for greater safety and stability. Citizens were more tolerant, and even eager, for top-down direction and oversight, and national leaders had more latitude to impose order in the ways they saw fit. In developed countries, this heightened oversight took many forms: biometric IDs for all citizens, for example, and tighter regulation of key industries whose stability was deemed vital to national interests. In many developed countries, enforced cooperation with a suite of new regulations and agreements slowly but steadily restored both order and, importantly, economic growth. [MORE]

Gallup Poll: The percentage of Americans who consider the death penalty to be morally acceptable has fallen to a record-low [Americans Talk about being civilized but are they?]

From [HERE] The percentage of Americans who consider the death penalty to be morally acceptable has fallen to a record-low, a new national poll by the Gallup organization has found.

According to the 2020 Gallup Values and Beliefs poll, released on June 23, 2020, 54% of U.S. adults now say the death penalty is morally acceptable. (Click here to see history of poll results.) That number represents a six-percentage-point decline over the course of the last year and is the lowest in the 20-year history of the poll. The results are 17 percentage points below the 71% of respondents who said in 2006 that the death penalty was morally acceptable.

Conversely, the percentage of Americans who said the death penalty is morally wrong reached a record high at 40%.

Gallup also measured the moral acceptability of the death penalty by political ideology. The percentages of self-reported moderates and liberals who said the death penalty was morally acceptable — 56% and 37%, respectively — both were the lowest recorded since the poll began in 2001. 67% of conservatives said they consider the death penalty to be morally acceptable. Belief in the acceptability of capital punishment was down significantly among all ideological groups since 2006, when endorsement of the moral acceptability of the death penalty was at its zenith. Since then, the number of conservatives and moderates who find the death penalty morally acceptable has declined by 12 percentage points, each. The number of liberals endorsing the moral acceptability of capital punishment has fallen by 22 percentage points during that period.

Gallup Research Consultant Megan Brenan said that the results of the organization’s 2020 Values and Beliefs poll are “in line with [Gallup] polling last fall that showed decreased public support for the death penalty and a record-high preference for life imprisonment over the death penalty as a better punishment for murder.” 

The organization’s October 2019 national death penalty poll reported that 56% of U.S. adults favored capital punishment, the second lowest level of support for the death penalty in 47 years. Sixty percent of U.S. adults who were asked to choose whether the death penalty or life without possibility of parole “is the better penalty for murder” chose the life-sentencing option. It was the first time since Gallup began asking the question in 1985 that a majority of respondents said they preferred life.

NYC City Council Approves Legislation Requiring the NYPD to Reveal the Secret Electronic Surveillance Tools it Uses to Monitor & Target Citizens [aka its enemies & slaves]

From [HERE] The New York City Police Department may soon be required to divulge information about its use of electronic surveillance tools amid growing concern that government agencies are using largely unregulated technology to monitor nationwide protests against police brutality.

The City Council overwhelmingly approved legislation, known as the POST Act, that would require the NYPD to issue a report for the first time to explain the tools at its disposal and their uses. The department maintains one of the country’s largest networks of surveillance cameras and has other tools such as facial recognition software, license plate readers and mobile phone trackers.

The legislation passed Thursday is one of a handful of NYPD changes that have been approved since protests broke out after the killing of George Floyd by Minneapolis police in late May. Privacy and civil liberties advocates say the bill, which was first introduced in 2018 but had lain dormant without a commitment that Mayor Bill de Blasio would sign it into law, may not have passed without the protests.

“People have been pushed too far to the limit, and they’re tired,” Councilwoman Vanessa Gibson, who sponsored the legislation, said at a news conference before the vote. “We have seen too many of our brothers and sisters who have been victims of police surveillance for far too long.”

De Blasio, under pressure by activists to support policing overhaul measures, last week signaled his support for the bill over the objection of the NYPD, which has said the bill would cripple anti-terrorist investigations and leave police officers exposed. Contacted by CQ Roll Call, a spokesperson for de Blasio declined to say when the mayor plans to sign the bill into law.

Proponents of the bill say it is long overdue and is only an underpinning for additional accountability measures in the future, in part because the bill does not actually govern police use of surveillance technology, just its disclosure.

Some cities have outlawed law enforcement use of certain tools, such as facial recognition, but the NYPD has resisted limits on what technologies it can and cannot use.

‘No, this is not me. You think we all look alike?’ Detroit Cops Obtained a Felony Warrant Based on a Faulty Facial Recognition Match and Arrested Black Man in Front of His Family. Detained 30 hours

From [HERE] On a Thursday afternoon in January, Robert Julian-Borchak Williams was in his office at an automotive supply company when he got a call from the Detroit Police Department telling him to come to the station to be arrested. He thought at first that it was a prank.

An hour later, when he pulled into his driveway in a quiet subdivision in Farmington Hills, Mich., a police car pulled up behind, blocking him in. Two officers got out and handcuffed Mr. Williams on his front lawn, in front of his wife and two young daughters, who were distraught. The police wouldn’t say why he was being arrested, only showing him a piece of paper with his photo and the words “felony warrant” and “larceny.”

His wife, Melissa, asked where he was being taken. “Google it,” she recalls an officer replying.

The police drove Mr. Williams to a detention center. He had his mug shot, fingerprints and DNA taken, and was held overnight. Around noon on Friday, two detectives took him to an interrogation room and placed three pieces of paper on the table, face down.

“When’s the last time you went to a Shinola store?” one of the detectives asked, in Mr. Williams’s recollection. Shinola is an upscale boutique that sells watches, bicycles and leather goods in the trendy Midtown neighborhood of Detroit. Mr. Williams said he and his wife had checked it out when the store first opened in 2014.

The detective turned over the first piece of paper. It was a still image from a surveillance video, showing a heavyset man, dressed in black and wearing a red St. Louis Cardinals cap, standing in front of a watch display. Five timepieces, worth $3,800, were shoplifted.

“Is this you?” asked the detective.

The second piece of paper was a close-up. The photo was blurry, but it was clearly not Mr. Williams. He picked up the image and held it next to his face.

“No, this is not me,” Mr. Williams said. “You think all black men look alike?”

Mr. Williams knew that he had not committed the crime in question. What he could not have known, as he sat in the interrogation room, is that his case may be the first known account of an American being wrongfully arrested based on a flawed match from a facial recognition algorithm, according to experts on technology and the law. [MORE]

Newest Method to Interfere with Your “Freedom of Movement" in the Free Range Prison: LAX is testing fever-detecting cameras as passengers depart and arrive

From [HERE] Starting Tuesday, some travelers at Los Angeles International Airport will be asked to undergo a new screening process long before they get to security checkpoints: walking past cameras that can flag travelers with a fever, which is a sign of the novel coronavirus.

Officials on Monday planned to announce a pilot program to test the use of thermal imaging cameras at the departures entrance and the corridor for international arrivals in the airport’s Tom Bradley International Terminal.

“We’re trying to do everything we can to make sure that our airport terminals are a safe environment, and we’re making sure that we’re doing everything we can to make it healthy for people to come in,” said Justin Erbacci, chief executive of Los Angeles World Airports.

Signs will direct travelers to walk through an area where cameras that detect whether someone has a temperature of 100.4 or higher are stationed. Those who show an elevated temperature will be pulled aside for a secondary screening to confirm. Participation will be voluntary, and the airport will not stop anyone from continuing with their journey during the pilot test — although workers will give advice from county and federal health officials about traveling with an elevated temperature.

Airlines that are doing their own temperature screening can still prohibit travelers from flying if they have fevers.

“Through this pilot, we are not going to stop anybody from traveling,” Erbacci said. “We want to test the accuracy of the technology and to understand if it is really able to capture accurate body temperatures of passengers en masse as they walk through this portal.”

During a launch event Monday, Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti urged travelers to opt in to the program, even though it is voluntary. [MORE]

6th Cir. Court [an all white jury] Says a 2nd Attempt to Execute a Black Man Isn’t “Cruel & Unusual" b/c Authorities Didn’t Intend to Inflict “Unnecessary Pain" During their Initial Murder Attempt

From [HERE] The Sixth Circuit denied habeas relief to a Black death-row inmate finding that a second execution attempt would not constitute a cruel and unusual punishment under the Eighth Amendment. On September 15, 2009, technicians attempted over the course of two hours to execute Broom. Even with the prisoner’s assistance, the state could not complete the lethal injection process, unable to find a suitable vein. The clear signs of pain exhibited by Mr. Broom during this process starkly illustrate the inherent cruelty of all executions.

Shortly after this failed execution attempt Broom filed a Section 1983 lawsuit in federal court, claiming that any attempt to execute him again would violate either the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition on cruel and unusual punishments or the Fifth Amendment’s bar on “double jeopardy.” See U.S. Const., amend. V (“[N]or shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb[.]”).

Dismissing his 8th Amendment claim In its ruling by Judges Alice M. Batchelder, Karen Nelson Moore and Julia Smith Gibbons [all white, pictured above], the court stated,

“the Constitution does not prohibit a state from executing a prisoner after having already tried—and failed—to execute that prisoner once, so long as the state (1) did not intentionally, or maliciously, inflict unnecessary pain during the first, failed execution, and (2) will not inflict unnecessary pain during the second execution, beyond that inherent in the method of execution itself. “The court agreed with the Ohio Supreme Court previous decision where it held that (1) “[t]he state’s intention in carrying out the execution [was] not to cause unnecessary physical pain or psychological harm,” and (2) Broom is unlikely to suffer severe pain during his second execution—or to endure yet another failed execution—because the state has since amended its execution protocols (with the federal courts’ approval), and has executed numerous prisoners under those revamped protocols. Broom, 51 N.E.3d at 631–32. And thus, the court concluded, the Eighth Amendment did not prohibit Ohio from attempting to execute Broom a second time.”

Romell Broom has been on death row for nearly a quarter of a century. He was sentenced to death in 1985 for the rape and murder of 14-year-old Tryna Middleton in September 1984. After the death sentence was upheld on appeal, Broom sought to join a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of Ohio’s lethal injection process. However, the courts dismissed his attempt, ruling that the challenge was time-barred and should have been made earlier.

Romell Broom’s execution was set for 15 September 2009 at 10am. The execution was delayed for several hours as a final appeal to the federal courts was awaited. Between 1 and 2pm, after the courts had lifted the stay of execution, the lethal injection team began preparations for the execution. After an hour of the team trying to find a suitable vein in his arms, Romell Broom tried to help them. According to Associated Press, "When his help made no difference, he turned onto his back and covered his face with both hands. His torso heaved up and down and his feet shook. He wiped his eyes and was handed a roll of toilet paper, which he used to wipe his brow."

Romell Broom’s lawyer was in the attorney waiting room. When she questioned the delay she was taken to a room where she could watch the procedure on closed-circuit television. She has said that "it was perfectly apparent that the execution was going very wrong”, and that Romell Broom was “wincing in pain” as the execution team held him down and tried to find a vein. At one point, she said, “they really hurt him”, and he “grimaced in pain”. She contacted her co-counsel to tell him what was happening – that the execution team had been trying for two hours to find a vein and had apparently now taken a "break." The co-counsel sent a letter by fax and email to the state Governor and the Chief Justice of the Ohio Supreme Court, urging that the execution be stopped. His letter to the court pointed out that in the ongoing legal challenge to Ohio’s lethal injection protocol, the state’s position had been that "the medical members of the execution team are skilled at obtaining IV access."

White government Doctors struggled for two hours in 2009 to find a suitable vein in which to inject Broom with lethal drugs. Above the more than a dozen marks left behind by doctors after the failed execution attempt. [MORE]

Governor Strickland, who had earlier denied Bloom clemency, issued a one-week reprieve. The warrant reads, "Difficulties in administering the execution protocol necessitate a temporary reprieve to allow the Department [of corrections] to recommend appropriate next steps to me...The Department should carry out Mr Broom’s sentence [on 22 September] unless further reprieve or clemency is granted." On 17 September, in relation to the Ohio lethal injection lawsuit, a federal judge ordered that by 21 September a statement be taken from Romell Broom about the execution attempt, and that the state disclose relevant documents by 28 September. [MORE]

In a State of Comparison Eric Trump Calls BLM Protestors "Animals" [Racists Believe They’re apart of an Imaginary hierarchy wherein persons unable to produce color & lacking melanin are supreme]

From [HERE] Eric Trump branded Black Lives Matter protesters "animals" on Saturday while speaking at his father's controversial campaign rally in Tulsa, Oklahoma, adding that President Donald Trump should be re-elected to protect the "moral fabric of this country."

Eric—the president's third child and second son—was a warm-up act for the president at the BOK Center in Tulsa where the rally was held, despite warnings it was not safe to do so given the rising number of COVID-19 coronavirus cases in Tulsa and Oklahoma. [MORE]

WHITE DEGENERACY WRONGLY CAST AS SUPREMACY. OSHO explains, “comparison is the root cause of misery. To be non-comparative – to be neither higher nor lower, just to be yourself; not to think in relation to others, just to think in terms of your tremendous aloneness – then you are happy.” Racists live in a constant state of comparison, which Dr. Blynd defines as follows: 

comparison - a disease of the mind due to the ignorance of uniqueness. Each individual is unique and beyond the scope of comparison. Those who fall victim to comparison will either become egoistic or bitter. You don't belong to any hierarchy - nobody is lower or higher than what "you" imagine yourself and "others" to be. Comparison creates differences or distinctions only when there is not uniformity. Comparison limits the possibility of living in the moment. (See: Judgment, Problems, Moment, Running Man, Surrender, Value, Exchange Value, Uniqueness, Awareness & Compassion). [MORE]

Racists are necessarily enemies to most of the inhabitants of the world because 90% of the world is non-white and they hate non-whites because they are not white. In his racist mind the racist imagines himself to be a member of another "race" within the human species and a part of a hierarchy wherein persons unable to produce color & lacking melanin are supreme and he imagines himself to be higher than what he imagines non-whites to be.

“We’re not mourning for George Floyd—I don’t think me or any of my staff are:" Racist Suspect CrossFit Founder Greg Glassman Sells Business after Revealing his Genocidal Tendencies Toward Blacks

("Always in the presence of color, whites will feel genetically inferior") What are the signs of someone being obsessed with exercising? 90% of the world in non-white. Racists maintain a different physical appearance from the rest of humankind, and they dislike this difference. [MORE]

From [HERE] Greg Glassman, the founder of CrossFit Inc., is selling his gym business to a technology executive, weeks after Mr. Glassman said he was retiring as CEO amid backlash over his inflammatory remarks about the killing of George Floyd. 

CrossFit said the closely held business was being acquired by Eric Roza, the owner of a CrossFit gym in Boulder, Colo. Mr. Roza is a technology entrepreneur and former OracleCorp. executive. Financial terms weren’t disclosed.

“It is time for the founder to bid adieu and find other creative outlets,” Mr. Glassman wrote on Twitter, announcing the sale. A spokesman for CrossFit referred to the social media posts.

The closely held company has faced a backlash, with gym owners and longtime sponsor Reebok saying they were cutting ties after Mr. Glassman’s inflammatory comments earlier this month. In a recent meeting with some gym owners, Mr. Glassman said, “We’re not mourning for George Floyd—I don’t think me or any of my staff are,” according to audio recordings of the meeting posted by BuzzFeed News.

Mr. Glassman later apologized [as nearly all racists do] and said he was retiring as CrossFit CEO and handing over the top job to one of his lieutenants.

Mr. Roza said he would take over as CEO and owner after the deal closes next month. He addressed the recent controversy, saying “divisive statements and allegations” had left many members of the CrossFit community struggling to reconcile the shared bonds and benefits they have experienced at the gyms with what they read online.

“My view is simple: Racism and sexism are abhorrent and will not be tolerated in CrossFit,” Mr. Roza wrote in a statement he shared on social media. “We open our arms to everyone, and I will be working hard to rebuild bridges with those whose trust we have lost.” [MORE]

3 White TBI Cops Use Batons to Beat a Handcuffed Black Man Lying in a Fetal Position as Another Holds Him Down & Smothers. Arrested after White Woman Reported ‘a Suspicious BM in a blue jumpsuit’

White Cop Artists Yelled “RELAX!” while Pretending to be Under Attack and to Act in defense of liberty. From [HERE] Hamilton County District Attorney General Neal Pinkston has requested the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation look into the beating of a Black man by Hamilton County sheriff's deputies on May 23.

"Stop, stop, stop, stop stop! No! Ma, they're cutting my air off!" a handcuffed and shackled Reginald Arrington Jr. cried out from beneath six officers, according to dashboard camera footage released by Pinkston's office.

The beating happened just two days before George Floyd, another handcuffed Black man, died as a white Minneapolis police officer The beating happened just two days before George Floyd, another handcuffed Black man, died as a white Minneapolis police officer pinned him to the ground with his knee on his neck for nearly nine minutes — sparking a worldwide protest movement.

Hamilton County Sheriff Jim Hammond said that, while he ordered an administrative review to take place, he will not be placing the deputies on administrative leave, meaning they will remain on duty. He identified them Sergeant Mickey Rountree, Corporal Brian Killingsworth, Deputy Nick Dewy, Deputy Todd Cook and Deputy Charlene Choate. [MORE]

He said the release of the footage "will improperly influence and sensationalize the events of this incident to the public without allowing the legal process to effectively take place."

The deputies, all white, had been called to the area by a [white] woman who lived in the 4800 block of Waverly Court in Ooltewah. She told deputies that a Black man in a blue jumpsuit was acting suspicious, walking up to women and "asking them questions and asked her how to get out of the neighborhood," court records state.

The deputies spotted the man, Reginald Arrington Jr., walking south on Old Lee Highway "in violation of the pedestrian on roadway law," which is what precipitated the arrest, according to court records.

Before arresting him, though, deputies questioned Arrington. He told them his car was broken down at a nearby motel, and it was leaking gasoline. So he'd gone to the neighborhood where a female friend lived, but she told him to leave.

Deputies then asked Arrington for his name and date of birth. They claim the information Arrington provided was false.

Arrington then began exhibiting what deputies called "erratic behavior" by emptying his pockets and "saying he didn't want to get shot," according to the arrest affidavit.

"He then laid down in the roadway with his hands stretched out," the affidavit reads. "Deputies advised him that was not necesarry and instructed him to get up. He was then placed under arrest for violation of pedestrian on roadway law."

While escorting Arrington to a patrol vehicle, deputies claim he grabbed Killingsworth's gun and "made several attempts to pull it from his holster."

Arrington was already handcuffed at the time, and both of his hands appear to be held by a deputy as they walk toward the patrol vehicle, dash camera video shows.

"Don't be stupid," one deputy is heard saying.

"I didn't do nothing!" Arrington screams repeatedly from the ground, in fetal position, as four deputies beat him with their batons.

"Please stop," he cries. His legs raise up multiple times as he screams.

"Put your legs down! Relax!" deputies order, still beating him.

"You're going to kill me," Arrington exclaims.

"Just relax. That's all you gotta do. Relax," a deputy responds as they continue to beat him.

At one point, one of Arrington's shoes comes off.

"Relax. Nobody wants to hurt you. Relax," a deputy says. "Piece of f — — s — —."

"He's completely combative still," a deputy is heard telling a dispatcher as Arrington lies on the ground, hands cuffed and feet shackled.

For five-and-a-quarter minutes, deputies beat Arrington and held him to the ground, the video shows.

Arrington's limp body is then picked up and placed in the back of a patrol vehicle.

Arrington was charged with resisting arrest, simple assault on police, criminal impersonation, pedestrian in roadway and four counts of aggravated assault on police. All of the charges were dropped on Tuesday by Pinkston.

"The video's horrific, and we believe that ultimately, everyone will make the right call as it relates to this unfortunate incident that Mr. Arrington was subject of," Arrington's civil attorneys, Troy Bowlin II and Mark Stephens, said.

The attorneys are conducting their own independent investigation of the incident, they said.

In a news release, DA Pinkston said the police body-worn camera and dashboard camera footage "caused enough concern to warrant an investigation" and, in addition to bringing in the TBI, has referred the matter to the Department of Justice for possible investigation, and notified the general counsel for Tennessee Governor Bill Lee.

"I have not made a final determination on anything related to this case," he said in a statement, "but what I saw in the videos was troubling. That's why I'm requesting a thorough investigation to ascertain whether or not excessive force was used in this incident."

Sheriff Hammond cautioned against a rush to judgment.

"We are a nation of law and order and in order to remain so, it is imperative we allow and encourage the legal process to take place," Hammond said. "This includes allowing for preliminary probable cause hearings to take place so all sides can be heard. As always, we welcome an outside review and will cooperate and offer any evidence necessary to seek a legal and appropriate resolution.

"As sheriff, it has always been my intention that this agency stand firm and remain transparent even in the harshest light of public scrutiny. However, I cannot sit back and remain idle while my deputies have their right to be heard infringed upon."

White Opelousas Cop Charged w/5 Felonies is On Paid Leave After Brutal Unprovoked Assault on Black Teen Restrained to Hospital Bed: Ct Docs say He Repeatedly Punched & Choked Teen Not Under Arrest

From [HERE] and [HERE] Opelousas Police Sgt. Tyron Andrepont will keep his job for the immediate future, even with five pending felony charges related to his alleged unprovoked felony assaults of a defenseless Black teenager who was retained to hospital bed.

Mayor Julius Alsandor said Andrepont will remain on paid leave until a departmental investigation wraps up, at which time the elected police chief, Martin McLendon, will present the findings to City Council. The council must approve any decision to terminate Andrepont. He has been on paid administrative leave since Opelousas Police Chief Martin McLendon was notified about the incident in November. Sergeant Tyron Andrepont (49) turned himself in on June 9, 2020. He has since been released on a $25,000 bond. He was ordered to have no contact with the victim or the victim’s family. He also is not allowed to be in possession of a firearm, according to court records. [MORE]

A hospital surveillance camera filmed as Opelousas Police Sgt. Tyron Andrepont repeatedly struck and applied a choke hold to a restrained black teenager in October 2019, court documents said. He attacked the teenager on 3 separate occasions.

On Oct. 30, Andrepont responded to Opelousas General Hospital’s south campus, where 18-year-old Jonah Coleman was receiving treatment in the hospital’s emergency room. Coleman had been taken to the hospital by his family at the request of his parents and was not in police custody, McLendon and the teen's attorney said. 

Louisiana State Police Investigator Mark Fournet reported footage from Coleman’s treatment room in the hospital’s emergency facility showed the teenager tried to get out of bed several times [which is not illegal]

At time stamp 7:18, Andrepont rushed toward Coleman, struck him in the face with his right hand and Coleman’s head snapped back. Andrepont reached for Coleman again but didn’t make contact, then pushed down on Coleman’s neck and upper chest before putting his hand on Coleman’s neck and pushing him away, the affidavit said.

At time stamp 7:37, Andrepont grabbed Coleman’s right leg and pushed his leg up and toward Coleman’s head. Five minutes later, Andrepont put his right hand on Coleman’s neck, pushing his head down. He maintained his hold on Colemna’s neck, according to court documents. At 8:32, Andrepont grabbed Coleman’s neck with his right hand and pushed his head down while maintaining “his hold on Jonah’s neck.” At 9:51, Fournet reported that Andrepont put his right arm around Coleman’s neck in a choke hold, the documents said.

Finally, at 10:18 p.m., Andrepont “held the handcuff that was still attached to Jonah’s right wrist and pulled it to the rear, extending Jonah’s arm.”

After reviewing Fournet’s report and the video, St. Landry Parish District Attorney’s Investigator J. Rene Speyrer wrote: “It is my opinion that Sgt. Tyron Andrepont, working as an officer with the Opelousas Police Department, committed several acts of battery on Jonah Shyheem Coleman Jr….”

McLendon said he was alerted by hospital staff about the incident in early November. He said staff told him about concerns that unnecessary force was used by an officer, potentially criminal behavior by the officer. McLendon said he immediately placed Andrepont on paid leave and asked state police to investigate.

Coleman’s Dallas-based attorney Daryl K. Washington said Andrepont used excessive force and treated his client in an “inhumane manner” as he “totally overreacted” by escalating the situation to violence when his client was not a threat to hospital staff, Washington said.

The St. Landry Parish chapter of the NAACP is calling for the firing of Andrepont, who was charged this month with five counts of felony malfeasance in connection with his handling of an October 2019 call to Opelousas General Health System’s south campus. [MORE]

Black Lives Matter to DC Mayor for PR Purposes Only: Jail Authorities Disregarded the Health Needs of its 90% Black Inmate Population, Spreading COVID. White Judge Still Denies Release

CHOCOLATE CITY ONLY IN THE JAIL. THE DC DOC STATES THAT BlackS ARE DISPROPORTIONATELY REPRESENTED IN DC JAIL AS the DC population is NOW ONLY 46.4% BLACK.

From [HERE] A white federal judge ruled Thursday that the D.C. Department of Corrections needs to implement various protocols to better handle the spread of Covid-19 in its jail, adding that they have shown a “deliberate indifference” to the health of the inmates. DC jail is at least 90% Black and nearly 50% are being held pre-trial.

“Plaintiffs have provided evidence that Defendants are aware of the risks that Covid-19 poses to Plaintiffs’ health and have disregarded those risks by failing to take comprehensive, timely, and proper steps to stem the spread of the virus,” U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly wrote in the 40-page opinion.

Among other things it stated, that inmates “have been exposed to an unreasonable risk to their health. It is undisputed that as of May 15, 2020, the rate of infection in DOC facilities was 13.5%, which is nearly 14 times higher than the rate of infection for other District of Columbia residents.”

The American Civil Liberties Union of D.C. and the Public Defender Service brought the class action against the DOC on behalf of 70 inmates in March, alleging that they were not receiving proper care.

Issues that the court found the facilities were neglecting included medical care, social distancing, sanitation and confinement conditions. The order stated, “those detained in DOC facilities are far more likely to be exposed to and infected by COVID-19.” The jail failed to maintain social distancing practices, clean inmates cells or provide them any cleaning supplies and inmates in isolation were denied showers up to seven days in a row. The jail also refused to allow inmates to have unmonitored phone calls with legal counsel.

“The court notes that defendants’ policies, and the delayed and insufficient implementation of many of those policies, has prevented plaintiffs from being able to take the preventative and precautionary steps that the larger, non-detained population has been able to take to slow the spread of Covid-19,” the opinion states.

In an order alongside the opinion, Kollar-Kotelly lays out several new protocols for the facilities to take in order to insure the inmates can remain healthy.

While the judge did not order the release of any inmates, she did call for a detailed plan for a possible reduction of inmates in the future.

Kollar-Kotelly further ordered that the facilities provide proper sanitation, including cleaning cells, providing clean sheets, clothes and daily showers for inmates.

The D.C. jail system is also required to provide inmates with medical attention within 24 hours of them reporting health issues, provide more testing, enforce social distancing guidelines and ensure that inmates still have access to make legal calls.

Steven Marcus, attorney with the Public Defender Service, said in a statement he was thrilled with the decision.

“This is a huge victory for all of the human beings still incarcerated inside the D.C. jail,” Marcus said. “These long-awaited reforms will vastly improve the conditions inside the jail, and give everyone inside, prisoners and staff alike, a greater chance at surviving this pandemic.”

Scott Michelman, legal director for the ACLU of D.C. said in a statement that the DOC did not act fast enough.

“In today’s ruling, the Court rightly focused on actual conditions inside the facility, prioritizing the concrete findings of the court’s experts and the sworn evidence from affected prisoners over the government’s vague generalizations,” he said. “The court correctly found that the District’s efforts have been too little, too late, and that judicial intervention is necessary to avert grave risks of serious illness and death.”

While many states are taking steps to reduce the spread of Covid-19 in their jail facilities, more than 46,000 inmates nationwide have tested positive for it, a 5% increase from last week, according to The Marshall Project.

What is White Collective Power? When a White Jail Supervisor Supports Derek Chauvin’s Right to Murder George Floyd by Barring Any Non-White Corrections Officers from Guarding or Interacting w/Him

Anon Asks, What is collective power?

A: Collective power is the institutions and systems that benefit one group at the expense of another group, and allow one group to dominate another group in all areas of human activity.

For example, when a white policeman shoots an unarmed black man (50 times), his fellow officers, the police chief, internal affairs, the union, the media, the prosecutor, thejudge, and thejury will support, defend, and finance that white police officer’s “right” to shoot (murder) an unarmed black person. That is white collective power. [MORE]

From [HERE] Eight non-white corrections officers in Minnesota say they were sent to a separate floor of a county jail and barred from guarding fired Minneapolis police Officer Derek Chauvin after his arrest in the death of George Floyd, according to a report.

The non-white officers working in Ramsey County, who have filed a discrimination complaint, also say a supervisor told them they were viewed as a potential “liability” regarding Chauvin’s stay in the jail because of their race, the Star Tribune of Minneapolis reported.

SECOND MINNEAPOLIS COP LINKED TO GEORGE FLOYD CASE RELEASED ON BAIL: REPORTS

The jail superintendent who made the decision affecting the minority officers has since been demoted, the newspaper reported.

The matter has adversely affected morale among the county’s corrections officers, Bonnie Smith, attorney for the eight officers filing the complaint, told the newspaper.

One of the minority officers, whom the paper did not identify, wrote his reaction to the superintendent’s order.

“I understood that the decision to segregate us had been made because we could not be trusted to carry out our work responsibilities professionally around the high-profile inmate — solely because of the color of our skin,” the acting sergeant, who is black, wrote, according to the complaint. “I am not aware of a similar situation where white officers were segregated from an inmate.”

Laws are Just Words on Paper & are Only as Strong as Those who Enforce Them: 2 Weeks After Criminalizing Chokeholds 3 White NYPD Cops Hold Down a Black Teen While Another Appears to Use Choke Hold

As explained by undeceiver Dr. Amos Wilson: "Laws in and of themselves will not protect us; laws are words written on paper; laws protect no one. Laws are no stronger than those who enforce them."

From [HERE] As four New York City police officers piled atop a black man on a Queens boardwalk on Sunday, one of the officers seemed to tightly wrap his arm around the man’s neck.

“Stop choking him, bro!” a bystander filming the scene screamed as the man went limp on the ground. “Let him go!”

Within hours, the bystander’s video went viral and police swiftly suspended the officer who had apparently held the suspect in a banned chokehold, with the NYPD’s commissioner calling the video “disturbing.”

“Accountability in policing is essential. After a swift investigation by the Internal Affairs Bureau, a police officer involved in a disturbing apparent chokehold incident in Queens has been suspended without pay,” Commissioner Dermot Shea tweeted.

Police have not released the name of the officer who was suspended, but New York media outlets identified him by his badge number as Officer David Afanador. Relatives of the man who was arrested, 35-year-old Ricky Bellevue, told the New York Times that he has a history of mental illness.

The case comes days after both New York City and state passed laws criminalizing police chokeholds, a tactic that’s come under intense scrutiny amid protests in the wake of George Floyd’s death after a Minneapolis officer knelt on his neck for nearly nine minutes. The New York state bill, which makes police chokeholds that result in death or injury a felony, is named for Eric Garner, a black man who died in 2014 after repeatedly yelling “I can’t breathe” as an NYPD officer held him in a chokehold.

Sunday’s incident happened around 8:45 a.m. in Rockaway Park after officers responded to reports of a man yelling at people, the Times reported.

In body camera footage released by the department, several officers stand in a line along the boardwalk as three men taunt them and film the exchange with cellphones. The video shows police laughing as the men insult them.

The video takes a turn when Bellevue walks up to police and asks, “You scared?” The officers suddenly move to grab Bellevue, wrestling him to the ground. It’s not clear what precipitated the arrest. Police told NBC News that Bellevue had alarmed officers by approaching with a bag.

Video of the moment shows one of the officers appearing to lean on Bellevue with all his weight as his arm hooks around his neck. As the man filming yells in alarm, another officer taps the officer apparently applying a chokehold on the back, and he relents.

Bellevue lost consciousness during the arrest, Lori Zeno, his public defender, told the Times, and he had a bloody scalp and swollen wrists hours later in custody. He was reportedly booked on suspicion of disorderly conduct, obstructing governmental administration and resisting arrest.

Afanador, the officer suspended in the case, has been accused of brutality before. In 2014, he was charged with assault after allegedly breaking a 16-year-old’s teeth by hitting him in the mouth with his service weapon during a drug arrest; he was found not guilty by a jury two years later.

NYPD has banned the use of chokeholds since 1993. New York Mayor Bill de Blasio (D) praised the department for quickly suspending the officer on Sunday.

But Zeno urged the police to go further by charging Afanador under the new laws criminalizing chokeholds.

“I want the officer who put him in a chokehold to be in the cell next to him,” Zeno told the New York Daily News. “This guy should be charged criminally, and fired.”

Treadmilling Reformers are Seeking Nicer Masters: They Believe Cops Should Have Authority to Forcibly Control Us & Take Our Lives So Long as They Do the Right Thing & Reduce their Budgets

MASTERS & SERVANTS WORKING IT OUT. The WSJ explains, As Cuomo Pushes Police Reforms, State Police Funding Rises. New York’s governor has signed an executive order mandating local departments develop a reform plan by next year or risk losing state funding.

If a “public servant," such as a police officer, is uncontrollable, unaccountable, can’t be hired or fired by you, has irresponsible power over you and provides a compulsory “service” that you are obliged to accept then he is actually your Master.

An essential difference between private security workers and police officers is that security workers possess no government authority or right to initiate unprovoked acts of violence on other people. FUNKTIONARY explains that unprovoked violence against others or the use of “force” is the basis of all social evils and can only be used in the sense of attack not defense. It explains that authority, the right to rule over other people, is not a force but a farce, literally not real or “make believe.”

Allegedly governmental power comes from the people. That is, we delegate our individual power to the government for it to act on our behalf. However, it goes without saying that people cannot delegate powers or rights that they do not possess. So if people have delegated their powers to lawmakers and lawmakers have empowered police officers to act on our behalf, how did police acquire the moral right to commit acts of unprovoked violence on people? Asked differently, if you don’t have the right to initiate unprovoked acts of violence against other people then how can you delegate or authorize police officers or anyone else acting on your behalf to do so? How did government representatives and police acquire such extra or super-human powers?

Undeceiver Larken Rose states:

“Government” itself does no harm, because it is a fictional entity. But the belief in “government” – the notion that some people actually have the moral right to rule over others – has caused immeasurable pain and suffering, injustice and oppression, enslavement and death. The fundamental problem does not reside in any set of buildings, or any group of politicians, or any gang of soldiers or enforcers, The fundamental problem is not an organization that can be voted out, or overthrown, or “reformed.” The fundamental problem is the belief itself – the delusion, superstition and myth of “authority” – which resides in the minds of several billion human beings, including those who have suffered the most because of that belief. Ironically, the belief in “authority” dramatically affects the perception and actions even of those who are actively fighting against a particular regime. The superstition drastically alters and limits the ways in which dissenters “fight” oppression, and renders nearly all of their efforts impotent:. Furthermore, on the rare occasion that a particular tyrant is toppled, one form of oppression is almost always replaced by another – often one that is even worse than the prior one.

Instead of fighting against a non-existent beast, what “freedom fighters” need to do is to recognize that it is not real, that it does not exist, that it cannot exist, and then act accordingly. Of course, if only a few people overcome the superstition, they will likely be ridiculed, condemned, attacked, imprisoned or murdered by those who are still firm believers in the myth, But when even a significant minority of people outgrow the superstition, and change their behavior accordingly, the world will drastically change. When the people actually want true freedom, they will achieve it without the need for any election or revolution.

The trouble is, almost no one actually wants humanity to be free, and almost no one opposes oppression in principle, To wit, the effects of the myth of “authority” remain intact even in the minds of most people who consider themselves to be rebels, nonconformists and free-thinkers. During their teenage years, many people go through a period of apparent rebelliousness, which consists mostly of doing whatever those in “authority” tell them not to do: engaging in smoking, sexual promiscuity, drug use, wearing different clothes or hairstyles, getting tattoos or body piercings, and so on, As such, their actions are still controlled, albeit in a backward way, by the myth of “authority.” Instead of obeying for the sake of obeying, they disobey for the sake of disobeying, but still show no signs of being able to think for themselves. They behave like angry children instead of complacent children, but still do not behave like adults. And in most cases, their natural desire to break the chains of “authority” does not last long, they “outgrow” their anti-authoritarian tendencies, and gradually transform back into “model citizens,” i.e. obedient subjects.

For example, the supposedly radical, anti-authoritarian hippies of the 1960s more or less became the new “government” in the United States with the presidency of Bill Clinton. Even the “peaceniks” whose mantra was “live and let live,” when given the opportunity to become the new “authority,” chose to forcibly meddle with the lives of others as much as or more than their predecessors did, including via military conquest. Likewise, those in “Generation X,” the “MTV” crowd, and so on, have always focused their efforts on putting people who agree with them into power, instead of working to actually achieve freedom. There is a fundamental difference between having complaints about a particular ruling class, and recognizing and opposing the insanity of “authority” in principle, In short, in all the various societal manifestations of so-called rebelliousness and non-

conformity, almost none have actually escaped the myth of “authority.” Instead, they have merely attempted to make a new “authority,” a new ruling class, a new “government,” a new centralized machine of coercion through which they could forcibly subjugate and control their neighbors. In short, nearly all so-called “rebels” are phonies, who pretend to be resisting “the man,” but who really just want to be “the man.”

And this should be expected, If one starts with the assumption that there should and must be an “authority,” and that a “government” exerting control over a population is a legitimate situation, why would anyone not want to be the one in charge? Each person, by definition, wants the world to be the way he thinks it should be, and what better way could any person accomplish that than by becoming king? If someone accepts the notion that authoritarian power is valid, why would he not want it to be used to try to create the world as he wants it to be? This is why the only people who truly advocate freedom in principle are anarchists and voluntaryists – people who understand that forcibly dominating others is not legitimate, even when it is called “law,” and even when it is done in the name of “the people” or “the common good,” 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. Even those who advocate a relatively limited, benign type of “government” are advocating against freedom. 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. History is replete with examples, such as Fidel Castro and Guevara, who portrayed themselves as “freedom fighters” just long enough to become the new oppressors. They were no doubt quite genuine in their vehement opposition to the oppressions which they and their friends suffered from, but they were not opposed to authoritarian oppression in principle, as clearly demonstrated by their behavior once they obtained power themselves. This pattern has been repeated over and over again throughout history, with the resentment of one tyrannical regime becoming the seed of the next tyrannical regime. Even Hitler’s rise to power was due in large part to anger at the perceived injustices and oppressions inflicted upon Germany via the Treaty of Versailles. Of course, as long as the rebels suffer from the superstition of “authority,” their first priority, once they have overthrown one “government,” will be to set up a new one. So even acts of great bravery and heroism, among those who still believe in “government,” have accomplished little more than replacing one tyrant with another. Many have been able to recognize and oppose specific acts of tyranny by specific regimes, but very few have recognized that the underlying problem is not who sits on the throne; the problem is that there is a throne to sit on.

The same failure to recognize the real problem occurs in more mundane, relatively peaceful “reform” as well. In the U.S., for example, a large portion of the population is perfectly able to see the injustices resulting from the “war on drugs,” global warmongering, and other violations of civil rights committed by Republican tyrants. However, not recognizing the belief in “authority” as the real problem, the solution proposed by those who recognize such injustice is to give the reins of “government” to Democrat tyrants instead. Meanwhile, another large portion of the population is perfectly able 10 see the injustices resulting from heavy “taxation,” “government” micromanaging of industry, wealth-redistribution schemes, citizen disarmament (”gun control”), etc. But, not recognizing the belief in “authority” as the real problem, the solution proposed by those who recognize such injustices is to give the reins of “government” back to Republican tyrants. And so, decade after decade, the machine of oppression changes hands, while individual freedom, in all aspects of life, continues to dwindle. And still, all that most Americans can even contemplate as a solution is yet another election, or another political party, or another lobbying effort, in the hope of begging the ruling class to be more wise or benevolent.

Some people, seeing the disaster caused by the two-party system, blame “extremism” for the negative effects of “government.” They surmise that if people would only support a form of coercive control somewhere in between the “far left” and the “far right,” things would improve. Such people claim to be independent, openminded and moderate, but in reality are merely general advocates of oppression instead of being advocates of a particular flavor of oppression. The “left” and “right” are merely two masks which the one ruling class wears, and making a new mask which is a compromise between the other two will have no effect whatsoever upon the nature of the beast or the destruction it causes, Taking a position halfway between “left-wing” tyranny and “right-wing” tyranny does not result in freedom; it results in bipartisan tyranny.

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.”

"TREADMILLING. There is abundant historical proof that protesting white fait accompli is an exercise in Black futility" - Sam Greenlee

"TREADMILLING.

There is abundant historical

proof that protesting white

fait accompli is an exercise

in Black futility"

by Sam Greenlee

Anon explains:

Q: Why is it called “Racism/White Supremacy?”

A: Because this describes exactly WHO is practicing racism. For one group to practice racism that group must have MORE POWER than another group. Since whites control ALL the major areas of human activity in America — housing, education, health, entertainment, economics, politics, law, and religion — it is accurate to define all “racism” as “white supremacy.” We must be accurate so the victims of racism do not become confused. 

Q: Isn’t all racism the same, regardless of who is practicing it?

A: There is only ONE kind of racism: white supremacy. White people are the only group in America with the POWER to discriminate (deprive or punish other ethnic groups), and the systems and institutions to maintain the imbalance of power.

For example, rich people are more powerful than poor people. Rich people have the POWER to discriminate against poor people by depriving them of income, promotions, jobs, housing, land, justice, and any other rights – if they choose to do so.

In America, whites have the POWER to discriminate against blacks (and other non-whites) by depriving them of income, promotions, jobs, housing, land, justice, and any other rights – if they choose to do so. It doesn’t matter that some whites are poorer than some blacks.

In all things and in all places in America, whites are collectively more powerful than blacks are collectively. This imbalance of (white) power creates the opportunity and the ability to practice racism against non-whites. Racism is not empty rhetoric (words) or mindless emotion. Racism is economic, political, institutional, and systematic POWER. Since whites control all the institutions and systems of power in America, only whites have the power to practice racism.

Q: Why are people referred to as “groups” instead of “races?”

A: Because there is ONLY ONE RACE: the white race. To prove this statement, let’s look at the TRUE meaning of “race.” In ancient civilizations tens of thousands of years ago (before Europeans inhabited the planet), the world’s people identified themselves by bloodline, birthplace, and culture – but NEVER by the artificial construct (concept) of “race.”

What is the “black race” in real terms? It does NOT describe the place where black people were born because there is no such place as “black land,” (or red, yellow, brown, or white land). Race does not describe a person’s religion because there is no such thing as a black, red, brown, yellow, or white religion.

Race does not describe a person’s culture (except in false, stereotypical terms), and it does NOT define biology, ethnicity, or nationality. Race does not describe skin color because the so-called “black race” includes people whose complexions range from the palest pink to the purest blue-black. Therefore, “race” is a false, man-made concept.

Q: If “race” is a false concept, why was it created?

A: Race was created for ONLY one purpose: to practice race-ism (racism). To practice “racism,” whites had to separate themselves from other groups of people by artificially creating different “races.”

Q: Why was “racism/white supremacy” created?

A: Dr. Frances Cress Welsing, a black psychiatrist and the author of ‘The Isis Papers: The Keys to the Colors’ (1991), states that White Supremacy is practiced by the global “white” minority on the conscious and unconscious level to ensure their genetic survival by any means necessary.

Because of their “numerical inadequacy,” whites may have defensively developed “an uncontrollable sense of hostility and aggression” towards people of color, and developed a social, political, and economic structure to give blacks and other non-whites the appearance of being inferior.”

Q: Who decides what “race” a person will be?

A: The same (white) people who created the concept of race. If the ONLY purpose of “race” is to practice racism, and whites are the only group or “race” (in a white supremacy system) that can practice racism, then it is logical to assume there is ONLY ONE RACE: the white race.

Q: If the white race is the only race, what are the other ‘groups’ called?

A: There are three types of people in a white supremacist system:

1. Non-white people

2. White people (Racist Suspects)

3. White Supremacists (Racists)

Q: What is a “Non-White” person?

A: Anyone who is NOT classified as “white.” This includes all black, red, yellow, and brown people aka “people of color.”

Q: What is a “Racist Suspect?”

A: ANY white person who is CAPABLE of practicing racism against non-whites. Since all whites are able to practice racism in a white supremacy system if they choose to do so, it is correct (and logical) to use the term “racist suspects” to identify whites who do not openly function as white supremacists (racists). This is not a hateful, unjust, or racist statement, but it is a logical statement.

Q: What is a “White Supremacist?”

A: A white person (a racist) who practices racism against non-whites. Being a white supremacist has nothing to do with income, title, or status. It does not mean a white person belongs to the KKK, the Aryan Nation, or is covered with Nazi tattoos. A white supremacist can be a soccer mom, a businessman, or a US Senator if they are practicing racism against non-whites. Another term for a white supremacist is “racist white man” and “racist white woman.” [MORE]

Ishmael Reed: "Throughout my life, I have had frightening, maddening and absurd encounters with police officers."

By Ishmael Reed

From [HERE] Every black southern family that I’m aware of has a cold case. The murder of a family member by a white man about which records might have disappeared or been deleted. It’s family oral tradition that keeps the story alive.

My grandfather, Mack Hopkins, was stabbed by a white man on July 9, 1934. He told my mother that when he arrived at Erlanger Hospital in Chattanooga, Tenn., he overheard a doctor say, “Let that nigger die.” My mother was 16 at the time. My grandfather did die, and his killer remained free.

His death was my first encounter with the criminal justice system. Now, I’m trying to gather details about the murder of his sister Ready, who died after being struck by a car in Anniston, Ala., in the 1960s, while walking down a road. The two young white men in the vehicle that killed her, who were probably drunk, told family witnesses that they thought that she was a telephone pole — as though she never existed.

What happened to Mack and Ready could have happened to any black person. Maybe a future Justice Department will reopen these files so the murderers no longer walk free.

Like many black men, I’ve had numerous encounters with the police. Growing up in public housing, I learned at an early age that the Fourth Amendment didn’t apply to my family or our neighbors. The police would burst into our apartments at any time they wished. I’ve had police draw guns on me. Once, in 1958, Buffalo police stopped a car in which my companions and I were riding and pointed guns at us. They’d mistaken us for some other blacks.

In 1972, my wife and I were living in the Berkeley Hills neighborhood of Berkeley, Calif., while I worked on a novel. We used an advance from Doubleday to pay our bills. A policeman entered our small apartment with a gun drawn. He said he was investigating a homicide. But he left without any further discussion. I believe I’d aroused suspicion from the neighbors because I was a black man working at home.

The same excuse was used when the police came to our apartment on St. Marks Place in Manhattan on more than one occasion in the summer of 1969. Perhaps it had something to with my association with an underground newspaper that reported on police brutality. Reading Natalie Robins’ “Alien Ink: The F.B.I’s War on Freedom of Expression,” I learned that I may have been monitored by the F.B.I. in that era. William J. Maxwell wrote in “F.B. Eyes: How J. Edgar Hoover’s Ghostreaders Framed African-American Literature,” that many black writers of my generation were.

In 1975, I was invited to do a reading of my poetry by the Pulitzer Prize-winning poet Yusef Komunyakaa at the University of Colorado Boulder. Those chosen to put me up that night were two white men. They were wearing sweaters and seemed to be mimicking a counterculture style, but I noticed that they were a little too clean cut. The next day, as I was departing for the airport, one of my hosts told me that he had a bag of “good grass” as a gift to me. I rejected it. When I arrived at the Boulder airport, I was taken into a room. Officers inspected my carry-on bag and found only pens and paper. (I was working on a review of a biography of Muhammad Ali for The New York Times.)

The scariest incident, which I’ve written about over the years, including in “Another Day at the Front: Dispatches From the Race War,” occurred in New York City. I was walking down the street in the company of two companions. Seeing two policeman exiting a restaurant holding bags, I quoted, in a voice loud enough that one of them heard me, from a recent report on police corruption that accused officers of accepting bribes. A few moments later, my friends and I were continuing our walk when suddenly a police car sped toward us. [MORE]