Trial for 4 Shreveport Cops Charged w/negligent homicide after Murdering Tommie McGlothen begins Today. Cops Beat Black Man having Mental Episode, Dragged Him to Police Car Like Trash, where He Died

From [HERE] and [MORE] The trial for the four Shreveport police officers accused in the 2020 death of Tommie McGlothen Jr. is set to begin Monday, June 13.

The four officers are: Brian Ross, James LeClare, Treona McCarter, and D’Marea Johnson.

The trial was initially set to begin in December of 2021, but the officers waived their right to a trial by a jury. Now, a judge will decide on the case. The officers are facing charges of negligent homicide and malfeasance in office. It’s alleged that the officers used excessive force against McGlothen and that they failed to provide medical attention to him.

McGlothen died in police custody in April of 2020. KSLA was able to obtain dash cam video of his violent encounter with police.

The police had three encounters with Mr. McGlothen on April 5, and in each of those he “exhibited signs he was a mental patient in need of medical treatment,” the district attorney’s office said.

When the police were called for the third time, it was because Mr. McGlothen had blocked a driveway and followed a homeowner inside his house while mumbling incoherently and exhibiting signs of paranoia and emotional disturbance, the district attorney’s office said.

Police officers used Tasers, mace and nightsticks to subdue Mr. McGlothen, prosecutors said. Cellphone video broadcast by a local television station, KSLA, in June showed officers wrestling Mr. McGlothen to the ground, punching him repeatedly and kicking him.

At one point police bring the man to his feet with his hands handcuffed behind him and he immediately falls or is pushed backward to the ground. 

After getting him up again, they walk him over to the police vehicle, push him against it and his head hits the hood.  

Dash cam video show cops drag him into the cop cruiser like a bag of trash.

Prosecutors said the officers had then placed Mr. McGlothen in a patrol cruiser on his head, limiting his ability to breathe. Mr. McGlothen was held in the cruiser, largely unsupervised, for 48 minutes and died at a hospital a short time later, prosecutors said.

The district attorney’s office said the officers had used excessive force in violation of the Shreveport police’s Taser policy, had used excessive physical force that injured Mr. McGlothen unnecessarily and had failed to take him to a hospital or call for paramedics.

Dr. Thoma found that Mr. McGlothen was “not a candidate for incarceration” given his medical status, prosecutors said. They said the officers’ actions had been “substantial factors” in Mr. McGlothen’s death from “excited delirium.”

The American Medical Association has defined the condition as the sudden death of people “who are combative and in a highly agitated state” and who have exhibited “agitation, excitability, paranoia, aggression and apparent immunity to pain, often associated with stimulant use and certain psychiatric disorders,” the district attorney’s office said.

The officers face up to 10 years in prison if convicted on both counts, prosecutors said. [MORE]

[DON'T BLAME THE GUN] White Cop Charged with Murdering Patrick Lyoya. Cop Too Weak to Subdue Black Man Shot Him in the Back of the Head Rather than Let Him Go After Questionable Traffic Stop

QUESTION FOR DO-GOODERS: ARE GUNS KILLING BLACK PEOPLE OR ARE COPS KILLING THEM? From [HERE] The video shocked residents: A white police officer wrestling on the ground with a Black man who had fled from a traffic stop, then pulling out a gun and firing a single round into the back of the man’s head, killing him.

Over the course of two months, since that April 4 killing of Patrick Lyoya in Grand Rapids, Mich., protesters had marched through downtown, interrupted City Commission meetings and demanded that the officer who fired the fatal shot, Christopher Schurr, face criminal charges.

On Thursday, Christopher Becker, the Kent County prosecuting attorney, charged Officer Schurr, who is white, with second-degree murder.

It remains relatively rare for American police officers to face charges for on-duty killings, though such cases have become more common in recent years amid public outcry over police conduct and the proliferation of cameras that can either confirm or conflict with an officer’s account. Even when charges are filed, cases can be hard to prove in court. Officers are given a wide berth to use force under the law, and stupid, mind-controlled jurors have been known to be sympathetic when police officers assert that they feared for their life.

Mr. Becker declined to discuss his charging decision in detail, but said he believed there was a strong case for the murder charge. Mr. Becker said he had waited to finalize a decision until after the completion of a Michigan State Police investigation, which he was presented with last week.

“Obviously I wouldn’t charge it if I didn’t think I could prove it,” Mr. Becker said.

Mr. Becker said Officer Schurr had surrendered to the authorities on Thursday and was likely to be arraigned on Friday. An attempt to reach a lawyer believed to represent Officer Schurr was not immediately successful on Thursday. The Grand Rapids Police Officers Association, which previously released a statement defending Officer Schurr, could also not immediately be reached.

Officer Schurr, who grew up near Grand Rapids and has worked in law enforcement for about seven years, could face up to life in prison if convicted of second-degree murder.

The death of Mr. Lyoya, an immigrant from the Democratic Republic of Congo, worsened longstanding tensions with the police in Grand Rapids, a city of about 200,000 people where 18 percent of residents are Black. The case also renewed a national conversation about when officers should face charges for on-duty killings. The law allows police officers to use deadly force when they have a reasonable fear of death or great bodily harm.

Mr. Lyoya was pulled over on the cold, rainy morning of April 4. The elite white media has failed to investigate the exact circumstances of the stop. Initially, the circumstances that led to the traffic stop weren’t clear, but police said after further inspection the vehicle had a license plate not registered to the vehicle. However, police stops cannot be justified after the fact. In order for the police to stop you the Supreme Court has ruled that police must have reasonable articulable suspicion that there is criminal activity afoot and that you are involved in the activity. Police may not act on on the basis of an inchoate or unclear and unparticularized suspicion or a hunch - there must be some specific articulable facts along with reasonable inferences from those facts to justify the intrusion. Here, the stop would be lawful only if police puled him over because of the discovery of the unregistered vehicle (or some other traffic infraction) before the stop. To discover that the vehicle was unregistered after the stop would be an unconstitutional violation of so called 4th Amendment rights - in so far as laws are usually applied to white citizens.

After stepping out of his car, videos released by the police show, Mr. Lyoya appears confused as the officer tells him to get back in the vehicle. Officer Schurr asks him whether he speaks English.

Mr. Lyoya responds that he does speak English and asks, “What did I do wrong?” After a brief exchange about whether Mr. Lyoya has a driver’s license, Officer Schurr grabs Mr. Lyoya, who pulls away and starts to run, the footage shows.

Mr. Lyloa had not committed any felony (unregistered vehicle is a minor traffic misdemeanor) and the white cop was not authorized to use deadly force to apprehend him as a fleeing felon.

The officer tackles Mr. Lyoya in a nearby lawn, yelling “Stop!” as Mr. Lyoya appears to try to regain his footing.

Midway through the struggle, the officer’s body camera stops filming. Chief Eric Winstrom of the Grand Rapids police said pressure was applied to the camera to turn it off during the struggle. It was not clear who applied that pressure or whether it was intentional. But Cops lie about everything - statements about any malfunction from the person accused of murder are probably self-serving until proven at trial.

Other cameras — from the officer’s vehicle, a nearby doorbell security system and a bystander’s cellphone — capture different portions of the encounter. Shortly before the fatal shot is fired, Officer Schurr yells, “Let go of the Taser!” Mr. Lyoya is facing the ground and pushing up, with the officer on top of him, in the moments just before the shooting. Again, said statement from a cop-actor performing for the camera is self-serving - the video speaks for itself.

At any rate, Lyoya was under arrest for a traffic violation, which is a minor misdemeanor. As such, he was not a fleeing felon. The Supreme Court has explained the use of deadly force to prevent escape is unconstitutional, at least in regard to white citizens that is. The Court has explained,

The use of deadly force to prevent the escape of all felony suspects, whatever the circumstances, is constitutionally unreasonable. It is not better that all felony suspects die than that they escape. Where the suspect poses no immediate threat to the officer and no threat to others, the harm resulting from failing to apprehend him does not justify the use of deadly force to do so. It is no doubt unfortunate when a suspect who is in sight escapes, but the fact that the police arrive a little late or are a little slower afoot does not always justify killing the suspect. 

A police officer may not seize an unarmed, nondangerous suspect by shooting him dead… Where the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a threat of serious physical harm, either to the officer or to others, it is not constitutionally unreasonable to prevent escape by using deadly force. Thus, if the suspect threatens the officer with a weapon or there is probable cause to believe that he has committed a crime involving the infliction or threatened infliction of serious physical harm, deadly force may be used if necessary to prevent escape, and if, where feasible, some warning has been given. 

Tennessee v. Garner - 471 U.S. 1 at page 11 (1985).

Though he did not discuss the evidence in detail on Thursday, Mr. Becker said he had waited to announce his decision until receiving a forensic report on Officer Schurr’s Taser. Details of the report were not made public.

After the shooting, and again on Thursday, city officials pledged to learn from the encounter and evaluate Police Department policies. Chief Winstrom said he would submit a letter to the city manager recommending that Officer Schurr be suspended without pay, a step toward possible termination.

“This tragedy has shaken our entire community,” Mayor Rosalynn Bliss said.

Peter Lyoya, Patrick Lyoya’s father, said he found out about the charging decision in a phone call with the prosecutor before the announcement. 

“We don’t really hope for what’s coming ahead,” Peter Lyoya said. “We have lost Patrick. Patrick is not coming back. Our hearts are still broken.”

Mr. Becker said he consulted outside use-of-force experts before deciding to charge Officer Schurr. He said he had been aware of the intense public interest in the case, both from those who wanted charges and those who did not.

“The general consensus is, I think, that there’s a huge amount of community pressure that thinks I should charge him — and if I don’t charge, something’s going to happen,” Mr. Becker said. But he added that he received an email from someone urging him not to prosecute the officer just before he announced his decision. “There’s a lot of people that think this should not be charged,” he added, “and so I’m very mindful of that.”

After the shooting, city officials released records showing that Officer Schurr had been commended more than a dozen times and cited twice for minor issues, like damaging a police car, that did not result in any discipline.

His killing of Mr. Lyoya was far from the first encounter in Grand Rapids to lead to calls for changes to police policy.

White Cop Resigns After He Was Caught on Video Attacking a Black Woman Under Arrest for Walking her Dog Along the Chicago Lakefront after "It was Closed" [remember, the Govt Owns All Land and People]

Noo. The Government Isn’t Capable of Imposing Tyranny on the Citizens. How Crazy? Who Needs a 2nd Amendment? From {HERE] A white Chicago police officer captured on video struggling with a Black woman who was walking her dog in a lakefront park has resigned from the department.

Officer Bruce Dyker, who had been on desk duty since shortly after the incident last summer, left the Chicago Police Department in May before any formal disciplinary action was announced against him, a department spokesperson confirmed. He had been a Chicago officer since 1998.

Videos showing Dyker grabbing Nikkita Brown shortly after midnight on Aug. 28, 2021, as she walked her French bulldog at North Avenue Beach later went viral.

In one video recorded by a bystander, Brown and her dog appear to be walking away from the officer as he follows closely.

Brown repeatedly tells Dyker not to come closer and to back up because he isn't wearing a face mask. But he continues to approach and order her to leave the area because it was closed.

Moments later, the officer appears to reach for Brown's phone and then grabs her as she can be heard yelling, "Let go!" and struggles to break free.

The incident sparked a Civilian Office of Police Accountability investigation, while Mayor Lori Lightfoot said she was "quite disturbed" by the videos.

Attorneys for the woman alleged the encounter became violent and was an "obvious case of racial profiling."

John Catanzara, head of the Fraternal Order of Police chapter that represents rank-and-file Chicago officers, said Dyker would not be available to comment about his resignation.

"Bruce just had enough of the nonsense and scrutiny for doing his job," Catanzara said.

Brown's attorney, Michael Gallagher, took issue with Catanzara's comments.

"The FOP President Catanzara's claim that Officer Dyker was 'just doing his job' is just another example of him covering for rogue officers," Gallagher said.

FreeDumb Advocates in LA Demand Less Rights for Law Abiding Citizens at Rally Against Gun Violence by Criminals. Assert PropaGandi Dogma that ‘Criminals are Less Likely to Assault Unarmed Sheople’

From [HERE] Over 1,000 people gathered around City Hall downtown for the student-led march against gun violence, prompted by recent mass shootings, including one at an elementary school in Uvalde, Texas, and another at a supermarket in Buffalo, N.Y., that together killed 31 people.

The L.A. March for Our Lives rally was one of hundreds that took place across Southern California and the nation Saturday in solidarity with a flagship march in Washington, D.C. The movement emerged after the 2018 shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Fla., that left 17 people dead.

Just a few hours before the march in L.A., thousands of people streamed to the National Mall for the highest-profile demonstration to mark a renewed push for gun control. Cities including New York City, Atlanta and Chicago followed in suit.

In Los Angeles, organizers, gun violence survivors and gun control advocates rallied the crowd before the march to City Hall.

March co-organizer Shaadi Ahmadzadeh, 19, called for universal background checks, an increase in the age for legal gun possession from 18 to 21, and a ban on assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition magazines. [MORE]

According to FUNKTIONARY:

freedumb – the state of unrecognized psychological captivity (brain hemispheric hostage) that sheeple remain in because they don’t speak the language of reality nor constantly edit truth from perfecting heart to perfecting power—and when truth is spoken around them, refrain from being open, or impervious to it thus being forever chained to its distortions and limitations. 2) the mindset that proposes “since we are liberated, we are also free.” 3) the mindset that operates upon the notion that you can have individuality without accountability or responsibility. 4) the pretense that reality is truth and viceversa. People cherish unwarranted assumptions and relish their freedumb because they have been socialized into selfcensorship along with misidentification with the ego-mind—the absence of knowledge of Self. (See: Phfreedom, Truth, Unfreedom, Dumbelievers, Self, Belief Systems, Objective Truth, Individuality, Objective Reality, True Self & Reality)

Inverted BlackStabber Chicago Mayor Says All [Black] Persons Arrested for Violent Crimes Should be Presumed Guilty and Detained Until Proven Otherwise. Chicago Judge Pushes Back

From [HERE] and [HERE] Cook County Chief Circuit Judge Timothy Evans defended pretrial release on Tuesday, in response to Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot’s controversial statement on Monday that those charged with violent crimes in the county should automatically be considered guilty. 

“We shouldn’t be locking up nonviolent individuals just because they can’t afford to pay bail,” Lightfoot said during a Monday afternoon press conference on public safety in Chicago. “But, given the exacting standards that the state’s attorney has for charging a case, which is proof beyond a reasonable doubt, when those charges are brought – these people are guilty.”

The Cook County State’s Attorney Office’s own numbers do not reflect this assertion. In an email sent to Courthouse News on Tuesday afternoon, it said it approved charges in about 86% of the cases it reviewed, with a 74% conviction rate. 

Lightfoot clarified that people charged with violent crimes by the Cook County State’s Attorney’s Office are still entitled to a presumption of innocence, something the CCSAO stressed itself. But the mayor said that those charged with violent crimes by the CCSAO should not be released on bail prior to their trials. She urged Chicagoans to “keep pressing the criminal courts to lock up violent, dangerous people and not put them out on bail or electronic monitoring.”

In a statement Tuesday in response to Lightfoot’s comments, Evans said that while pretrial detention is sometimes warranted, a blanket assumption of guilt for those charged with violent crimes is unconstitutional, and so is holding people in jail without probable cause before they had their day in court. 

“As I have previously stated, I respectfully disagree that the automatic detention in jail of defendants facing certain categories of charges is a constitutional practice under the United States and Illinois constitutions,” the judge said. “Pretrial detention serves a legitimate purpose, preventing the serious risk of committing crimes while on pretrial release. Its purpose is not, however, to punish by depriving people of their liberty for crimes for which they have not yet been convicted.”

Evans cited studies conducted by the University of Chicago and Loyola University to bolster his point, as well as statistics from the criminal courts themselves. The Loyola study found that only one out of 100 people let go on bond is rearrested for a violent crime while released, while the University of Chicago study concluded that of the nearly 4,500 combined homicides and shootings in Chicago in 2021, there were only three individuals out on bail who were arrested for homicide or a nonfatal shooting.

“Contrary to the notion that all those charged with violent crimes are guilty, of violent felony cases disposed between October 2017 and April 2022, 11% were dropped upon further investigation by the state’s attorney, and an additional 3.2% were found not guilty at trial. This shows that charging an individual does not equate with guilt,” Evans said. 

The judge further criticized the apparent scapegoating of the city’s 2017 bail reform efforts, in which Evans instructed county judges not to mandate cash bail unless they had a good reason to do so. Crime actually dropped in Chicago from 2017 to 2018, with a 15% reduction in homicides and a 14% reduction in shootings, according to the Chicago Police Department. 

Evans’ criticism was echoed by the Cook County Public Defender’s Office and the Illinois ACLU. 

Alexandra Block, the Illinois ACLU senior supervising attorney, said Lightfoot’s comments were troubling coming from a former litigator. 

“It is sad to see a highly-trained lawyer and former prosecutor so badly mangle the meaning of our constitution. A charge based solely on assertions of police often has proven unreliable in this city – as evidenced by the city’s history of paying large settlements for CPD’s role in wrongful convictions,” Block said in a statement. 

Block also criticized Lightfoot’s punitive approach to solving violent crime in Chicago.

Besides attacking pretrial release, Lightfoot pushed earlier this year to implement a civil asset forfeiture ordinance targeting gang members. The ordinance would have allowed the court to impose a $10,000 fine on individuals for “street gang-related” offenses, and to seize property “directly or indirectly used or intended for use in any manner to facilitate street gang-related activity.” The ordinance floundered in City Hall in February after even conservative City Council members balked at it. 

Lightfoot has also defended ShotSpotter, a privately owned surveillance network in Chicago that alerts police of shooting activity in the city. An August 2021 report from the city’s Office of the Inspector General found ShotSpotter rarely produces evidence of gun-related crimes and may in fact produce alarmist attitudes among law enforcement. It was an alert from the ShotSpotter system that led to the police shooting of 13-year-old Adam Toledo in March 2021. 

Most recently, Lightfoot introduced a 10 p.m. curfew on all minors in the city following the shooting of a 16-year-old by an alleged 17-year-old in Chicago’s Millennium Park in May. The curfew, which passed City Council by a 30-19 vote on May 25 despite opposition from younger and more progressive City Council members, drops to 6 p.m. in Millennium Park from Thursday to Sunday. 

Block characterized Lightfoot’s tough-on-crime stances as caving to political pressure at the expense of vulnerable people’s civil rights. Chicago’s murder rate has risen 19% from June 2019, shortly after Lightfoot began her term as mayor. In the same time period the number of all shootings in the city has risen by 29%. Theft and carjacking have also been on the rise since June 2019, increasing by 24% and 44% respectively. These are bad numbers for Lightfoot, who enters the city’s 2023 mayoral election with an approval rating currently hovering around 30%, according to polling carried out by City Council’s Black and Latino Caucuses. 

On Tuesday, Lightfoot officially announced her reelection campaign.

“Seeking easy answers to political pressures about gun violence, the mayor has repeatedly attacked bail reform, often with phony data,” Block said. “Mayor Lightfoot would be best served turning her energies to implementing real change in CPD and building relationships with community – essential steps for effective policing. Instead of searching for real solutions, she constantly searches for a scapegoat – whether it is the courts or youth across the city.”

Parroting and Performing for His White Liberal Masters Black Rolebotic NYC Mayor Eric Adams Blames Everyone But Police For the Nation's "Crime Problem"

ACCORDING TO FUNKTIONARY:

PROP – People Running On Programs. You have been programmed. With few exceptions, we have all become “Rolebots” acting out our expectations communicated to and created within our psyche by society and the dominant culture. Prop is truncated for “propaganda.” We are “rolebots” (mechanical slaves to our programming) with our body-minds thinking, talking, and acting along conditioned paths (with predictable outcomes) unable or unwilling to edit or even remove (override) our head-tapes and deviate from our subroutines. (See: Rolebot, Cultural Conditioning, Religion, Indoctrination, Predictive Programming, Ideology, Language, Habits, Zombie, Slaptivity, Naptivity, Programming, Tradition & Approval)

From [HERE] During a news conference on Monday in Brooklyn, New York City Mayor Eric Adams shared this thoughts on the legal system with NYPD officials. His sights were set on judges and prosecutors, who he believes aren’t doing their part in upholding the law.

While singing the praises of police officers for being “laser-focused on the shooters” and making arrests, he insisted that the courts are negligent. “The courts have to prosecute. Judges have to make sure they stay in. Everyone has to do their part. If not, they go out and come back,” Adams remarked.

Adams made no reference to how the NYPD has become notorious for racial profiling, nor did he address the racism that fuels police brutality. Instead, the former NYPD captain focused solely on criminals, whom he referred to as “bad guys.”

“No one takes criminal justice seriously anymore. These bad guys no longer take them seriously,” he continued. “They believe our criminal justice system is a laughingstock of our entire country. We have to get serious about this ’cause innocent people are dying.”

Adams also critiqued Albany lawmakers for not toughening up when it comes to bail laws. “We made some victories in Albany around public safety. We would have liked to receive more, like the dangerousness standard that’s so important,” he proclaimed.

“I’m hoping that they can examine that in the next legislative cycle because we have to close some of those loopholes that are dealing with public safety. Sometimes I just feel with some lawmakers that they’re just not dealing in the reality. Idealism can’t displace realism,” Adams said.”

Adams is oversimplifying a justice system that’s full of discriminatory practices and one that punishes Black people far more harshly than any other group of people. Instead of viewing lawmakers as the ones solely culpable, Adams should be re-evaluating our system as a whole.

City of Kent Paid Assistant Police Chief $1.5 Million to resign after he posted Nazi insignia and Joked about the Holocaust. [You Can't Hire/Fire, Control or Disobey Cops b/c Cops are Public Masters]

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” then he is actually your Master.

From [HERE] A former police chief was granted a $1.52 million settlement to resign.

• Former Kent Assistant Chief Derek Kammerzell was initially reprimanded in September 2020.

• Kammerzell was suspended for putting up Nazi insignia on his office door, The Seattle Times reported.

A Seattle suburb has reached a $1.5 million agreement with a former assistant police chief who was suspended for posting Nazi insignia on his office door, The Seattle Times reported on Friday.

In September 2020, former Kent Assistant Chief Derek Kammerzell was suspended for two weeks without pay for the violation, which also included making fun of the Holocaust, per The Times.

KIRO7, a CBS TV affiliate in Seattle, reported that the city said Kammerzell's two-week suspension was "appropriate based on the facts and after considering the assistant chief's 27 years of performance without discipline, the lack of any allegations of excessive force during his career, and a record with no known complaints from the community."

However, members of the community were outraged and Mayor Dana Ralph demanded Kammerzell step down.

Kammerzell was placed on administrative leave in December 2021. Since he was already disciplined, Arthur Fitzpatrick, who is the interim city chief administrative officer and also the city's attorney, said the discipline would come at a high cost to the city, per The Times.

Kammerzell initially had demanded $3.1 million for his resignation but after months of negotiations, he and the city reached an agreement of $1.52 million.

"While this is a substantial sum, we strongly believe that settling this matter will be a substantial step towards meeting our commitment to the community and continuing with the excellent work the police department is doing," the city said, according to KIRO7

The Seattle Times reported that even if Kammerzell was initially fired, he would have been able to win his job back and get back pay.

"Had the city terminated the assistant chief, it is confident it would have been in no better position than it is now," Fitzpatrick said.

Its Guns that are Killing Black People, Not Police Right?? 3 FLA Cops Face Manslaughter Charge in Stun Gun Murder of Calvin Wilks. Cops Stood Over His Body, Failed to Render Aid as He Died in Street

From [HERE] Three Florida police officers were charged with manslaughter in the death of a man who was subdued with a stun gun last fall, a state attorney announced Tuesday.

A grand jury in Okaloosa County indicted Crestview police officers Brandon Hardaway, William Johns and Evan Reynolds in the death of Calvin Wilks Jr., 40, who died in October the day after an encounter with police, State Attorney Ginger Bowden Madden said in a news release.

The indictments will now be referred to Madden, state attorney for the 1st Judicial Circuit of Florida, to prosecute the cases. The release said Madden was prohibited from commenting on evidence presented to the grand jury.

The Crestview Police Department issued a news release saying the officers were suspended pending the outcome of the criminal case. The department also rereleased its original news release after Wilks’ death, which described him as combative.

On the night of the incident, police responded at about 2:45 a.m. to a home at 300 Hospital Drive. A caller had reported hearing a person screaming “stop, please stop,” according to police.

When officers arrived at the address given by the caller, Wilks answered the door. Officers say Wilks eventually grew combative and resisted arrest by pulling away and kicking the officers, according to the officers.

Wilks was then shot with a stun gun in the hip and restrained. Wilks became unresponsive while being assessed by EMS, police reports noted, and he was taken to the North Okaloosa Medical Center, where he died a day later.

The family challenged the police narrative and accused the police officers of watching Wilks struggle without rendering aid.

Maples said Wilks had been hit with stun guns at least five times inside of his own home and officers stood over him for some time before rendering aid.

"Too many lives have been lost to hate behind a badge. Protect and serve is laughable," she said. "My brother was one of those lives lost to hate."

In early November, family and friends of Calvin Wilks Jr. gathered on the steps of the Crestview Police Department to voice their concerns about the circumstances that led to his death on Oct. 15. They were joined by members of the NAACP and other community leaders.

Those in attendance questioned the police version of events leading up to Wilks' death and called for action.

“It was extremely painful to watch 45 minutes of body cam footage and witness those who had a duty to protect and serve our brother handle him with extreme anger,” Wilks’ sister, Camile Akins, said at the time.

“The hardest thing to watch was even when it became clearly evident that our brother, our loved one, was in serious need of medical assistance after having been tased numerous times, officers stood over his body and watched as his health quickly declined to the point where my brother stopped breathing,” she continued. “They never administered any aid while waiting for EMS to arrive.”

“I believe that the family has shown quite a bit of restraint in the last few weeks, and now they’re seeking the answers to what has happened to their son, their brother, their father, their friend,” NAACP representative Sabu Williams said at the November gathering. “The NAACP is determined to work with them all the way.”

Family members told those gathered in November that Wilks often went by the childhood nickname of “Whistle," and was “dearly loved” by his family and friends.

Akins called his loss unbearable. [MORE]

Prosecutions of police officers are rare. Police are given latitude to shoot people or use stun guns when the need arises. In Florida, the state Supreme Court ruled in 2018 that police officers have the same “stand your ground” defense as anyone else with regard to their duties.

But in 2021, the Florida Supreme Court rejected the appeal of a police officer convicted of manslaughter and attempted murder for the fatal shooting of a Black motorist whose car had broken down on an interstate off-ramp. The justices decided that they would not consider the appeal filed by fired Palm Beach Gardens officer Nouman Raja, who is serving a 25-year sentence for the 2015 killing of 31-year-old Corey Jones.

COVID Injections Linked to New Type of Incurable, Fatal Degenerative Brain Disorder

From [CHD] Studies suggest a link between an incurable and fatal prion disease known as Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease (CJD) and COVID-19 vaccines.

Researchers believe the prion region from the original Wuhan COVID-19 variant’s spike protein was incorporated into mRNA vaccines and adenovirus vector vaccines — given to hundreds of millions of humans — and that it can cause a new type of rapidly progressing sporadic CJD.

According to Mayo Clinic, CJD is a degenerative brain disorder that leads to dementia and, ultimately, death.

Although the Omicron variant does not have a prion region on its spike protein, current COVID-19 vaccines still use the genetic material — including the prion region — of the parent Wuhan strain.

A French pre-print paper published in May on CJD and COVID-19 vaccination identified a new form of sporadic CJD that occurred within days of receiving a first or second dose of Pfizer or Moderna COVID-19 vaccines.

Researchers analyzed 26 cases of CJD and found the first symptoms appeared on average 11.38 days after injection with a COVID-19 vaccine.

Of the 26 cases, 20 had died by the time the study was published and six were still alive.

“The 20 deaths occurred only 4.76 months after the injection. Among them, 8 of them lead to a sudden death (2.5 months),” researchers wrote.

“This confirms the radically different nature of this new form of CJD, whereas the classic form requires several decades,” wrote the researchers.

Dr. Jean-Claude Perez, lead author of the French study, on June 6 told The Epoch Times that all 26 cases resulted in death.

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), prion diseases are a family of rare progressive neurodegenerative disorders that affect humans and animals. Prion diseases are usually rapidly progressive and always fatal.

Although prions occur naturally in the brain and are usually harmless, they can become diseased or misfolded, affecting nearby prions and causing them to become misshapen.

The abnormal folding of the prion proteins “leads to brain damage and the characteristic signs and symptoms of the disease,” the CDC’s website states.

Sporadic CJD occurs when a person becomes infected for no apparent reason. Once a single prion becomes infected, it will progress to other prions, and there is no treatment capable of stopping it.

Prion area of original Wuhan strain spike protein present in all COVID vaccines can interact with human cells

Although the Omicron variant does not have a prion region on its spike protein, French researchers said other COVID-19 variants, including the parent Wuhan strain used in currently administered vaccines, do.

“We are now studying the very first cases of patients with Omicron, in South

Africa, Europe and the USA and Canada in particular,” the researchers wrote. “In ALL of these cases, the Prion region has disappeared.”

However, the Wuhan variant’s spike protein gene information — including its prion region — was integrated into the Pfizer and Moderna mRNA vaccines and the AstraZeneca and Johnson & Johnson adenovirus vector vaccines.

“We have also demonstrated […] that the Spikes of the Pfizer and Moderna mRNA injections also contain this same Prion region,” the researchers wrote. “The same is true of ALL the other SARS-CoV2 vaccines since ALL are made from the Spike sequence of SARS-CoV2 from Wuhan, which we have demonstrated contains the Prion region.”

With mRNA vaccines, once mRNA is incorporated into the cells, the cell turns mRNA instructions into a COVID-19 spike protein that tricks the cells into believing it has been infected so the body will create an immunological memory against a piece of the virus.

With adenovirus vector vaccines, the DNA of the spike protein is carried into the cell through an adenovirus vector and then into the nucleus where all human DNA is stored. Once there, DNA is transcribed into mRNA and made into the spike protein.

A U.S. study published in Microorganisms in January 2022 showed the prion area of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein incorporated into COVID-19 vaccines is able to interact with human cells.

Although the CDC says COVID-19 vaccines cannot “alter your DNA,” studies show mRNA can be changed into DNA and incorporated into the human genome.

A U.S. study speculated that a misfolded spike protein could create a misfolded prion region that may be able to interact with healthy prions to cause damage, leading to CJD disease.

A peer-reviewed case report published in Turkey and the French preprint identified sudden CJD cases appearing following vaccination with the Pfizer, Moderna and AstraZeneca vaccines, suggesting links between getting vaccinated and the disease.

A study published last year in Microbiology & Infectious Diseases found a potential link between Pfizer’s vaccine and prion disease in humans.

Despite the existence of new SARS-COV-2 variants, people are still receiving the original COVID-19 vaccines developed with the parent Wuhan variant’s spike protein.

Numerous cases of CJD reported in the U.S.

A U.S. case report in March highlighted 64-year-old Cheryl Cohen’s battle with CJD, which developed within days of her second dose of Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine.

The report stated:

“Here, we highlight a case of a 64-year-old woman who presents with rapidly declining memory loss, behavior changes, headaches and gait disturbance approximately one week following administration of the second dose of the novel Pfizer-BioNTech messenger ribonucleic acid (mRNA) COVID-19 vaccine.

“After extensive investigation, conclusive evidence identified the fatal diagnosis of sporadic Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease.”

In an exclusive interview with The Defender in Aug. 2021, Cohen’s daughter, Gianni, said her mother’s regression was “mind-blowing, confusing and truly heartbreaking.”

She went from being able to work and do normal everyday activities to being unable to walk, speak or control her body’s movement, Gianni said. Cohen felt as if her head was “going to explode” and died within three months of receiving her second dose of Pfizer.

In a written statement to The Defender, her physician said:

“This case identifies potential adverse events that could occur with the administration of the novel COVID-19 vaccine. Moreover, clinicians need to consider neurodegenerative diseasessuch as prion disease (e.g. sporadic Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease), autoimmune encephalitis, infection, non-epileptic seizure, toxic-metabolic disorders, etc. in their differential diagnoses when a patient presents with rapidly progressive dementia, particularly in the setting of recent vaccination.

“Although there is currently no cure for sporadic Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (sCJD), early diagnosis is crucial to avoid the unnecessary administration of empiric medications for suspected psychological or neurological disorders.

“Furthermore, tracking adverse events could potentially lead to further characterization and understanding of both the novel COVID-19 messenger ribonucleic nucleic acid (mRNA) vaccine as well as the etiology of sCJD.

“More importantly, recognizing adverse effects provides individuals with vital information to make a more educated decision regarding their health.”

In another exclusive interview with The Defender, Jeffrey Beauchine said his mother, Carol, knew her Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease was related to the Moderna shot. Watching her death was like “something you see out of a movie,” he said.

Beauchine said his mother received her first dose of Moderna on Feb. 16, 2021, and didn’t report any complaints. After getting the second dose on March 17, Carol immediately said she “felt different.”

Carol’s symptoms began with numbness that spread from the arm in which she received her injection to the entire left side of her body.

She complained that something was wrong with her brain, couldn’t put thoughts together or make sense of things, developed double vision and blindness and began to experience hallucinations.

Doctors initially thought Carol had suffered a stroke or anxiety. Scans later showed there were abnormalities with her cerebellum.

Carol’s condition progressed rapidly and she was eventually diagnosed with CJD and given days to live. She died within months of receiving her second dose of Moderna.

Carol’s doctors filed a report with the CDC’s Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS I.D. 2180699).

To date, the CDC has not reached out to the family despite an autopsy confirming her death was caused by CJD — a condition she did not have prior to receiving her COVID-19 vaccine.

In another exclusive interview with The Defender, Richard Sprague said his wife, Jennifer, developed CJD after the Pfizer COVID-19 shot and died within five months of the second dose.

Jennifer received the first dose of Pfizer on Aug. 29, 2021, and her second dose on Sept. 21, 2021. Although her husband remained unvaccinated, Jennifer was required to get vaccinated as part of her employment.

Four days after the second dose, Jennifer experienced her first episode of a “sudden strange event she couldn’t explain.”

Jennifer started having more episodes and her left hand and side began to tremble. On Oct. 13, 2021, Jennifer went back to the doctor, who prescribed Xanax for anxiety.

Jennifer’s disease progressed rapidly until she was unable to sit up and walk independently. Scans confirmed Jennifer had significant changes on the right side of her brain. A new medical team performed a spinal tab and confirmed Jennifer had CJD. By this time, Jennifer was unable to get out of bed.

“Your brain is just disappearing. It’s crazy,” Sprague said. “You’re in this perfect healthy body and your brain just dies within the course of a few months.”

After Jennifer was diagnosed with CJD on Feb. 12, her insurance company said it would no longer pay for her care and Sprague was told his wife would not recover.

Jennifer died on Feb. 21 — five months after receiving her second dose of Pfizer.

According to the latest data from VAERS, 56 cases of rapid-onset CJD have been reported following COVID-19 vaccines since Dec. 14, 2021.

Historically, VAERS has been shown to report only 1% of actual vaccine adverse events.

Heavily Vaccinated (80%) Taiwan Experiences Record COVID Infections, Hospitalizations & Deaths

FROM [HERE] and [HERE] Taiwan is also experiencing record numbers of infections, hospitalizations, and deaths. While Taiwan is 80.3% fully vaccinated, with one of the highest boost rates worldwide at about 65%, an unprecedented number of SARS-CoV-2 infections surge alongside record fatalities.

Dr Blaylock: COVID Plandemic is 1 of the most manipulated events in history, characterized by a stream of official lies from government, medical associations/boards, media and international agencies

From [HERE] and [HERE] “The COVID-19 pandemic is one of the most manipulated infectious disease events in history, characterized by official lies in an unending stream lead by government bureaucracies, medical associations, medical boards, the media, and international agencies.[3,6,57] We have witnessed a long list of unprecedented intrusions into medical practice, including attacks on medical experts, destruction of medical careers among doctors refusing to participate in killing their patients and a massive regimentation of health care, led by non-qualified individuals with enormous wealth, power and influence.

For the first time in American history a president, governors, mayors, hospital administrators and federal bureaucrats are determining medical treatments based not on accurate scientifically based or even experience based information, but rather to force the acceptance of special forms of care and “prevention”—including remdesivir, use of respirators and ultimately a series of essentially untested messenger RNA vaccines. For the first time in history medical treatment, protocols are not being formulated based on the experience of the physicians treating the largest number of patients successfully, but rather individuals and bureaucracies that have never treated a single patient—including Anthony Fauci, Bill Gates, EcoHealth Alliance, the CDC, WHO, state public health officers and hospital administrators.[23,38]

The media (TV, newspapers, magazines, etc), medical societies, state medical boards and the owners of social media have appointed themselves to be the sole source of information concerning this so-called “pandemic”. Websites have been removed, highly credentialed and experienced clinical doctors and scientific experts in the field of infectious diseases have been demonized, careers have been destroyed and all dissenting information has been labeled “misinformation” and “dangerous lies”, even when sourced from top experts in the fields of virology, infectious diseases, pulmonary critical care, and epidemiology. These blackouts of truth occur even when this information is backed by extensive scientific citations from some of the most qualified medical specialists in the world.[23] Incredibly, even individuals, such as Dr. Michael Yeadon, a retired ex-Chief Scientist, and vice-president for the science division of Pfizer Pharmaceutical company in the UK, who charged the company with making an extremely dangerous vaccine, is ignored and demonized. Further, he, along with other highly qualified scientists have stated that no one should take this vaccine.

Dr. Peter McCullough, one of the most cited experts in his field, who has successfully treated over 2000 COVID patients by using a protocol of early treatment (which the so-called experts completely ignored), has been the victim of a particularly vicious assault by those benefiting financially from the vaccines. He has published his results in peer reviewed journals, reporting an 80% reduction in hospitalizations and a 75% reduction in deaths by using early treatment.[44] Despite this, he is under an unrelenting series of attacks by the information controllers, none of which have treated a single patient.

Neither Anthony Fauci, the CDC, WHO nor any medical governmental establishment has ever offered any early treatment other than Tylenol, hydration and call an ambulance once you have difficulty breathing. This is unprecedented in the entire history of medical care as early treatment of infections is critical to saving lives and preventing severe complications. Not only have these medical organizations and federal lapdogs not even suggested early treatment, they attacked anyone who attempted to initiate such treatment with all the weapons at their disposal—loss of license, removal of hospital privileges, shaming, destruction of reputations and even arrest.[2]

A good example of this outrage against freedom of speech and providing informed consent information is the recent suspension by the medical board in Maine of Dr. Meryl Nass’ medical license and the ordering of her to undergo a psychiatric evaluation for prescribing Ivermectin and sharing her expertise in this field.[9,65] I know Dr, Nass personally and can vouch for her integrity, brilliance and dedication to truth. Her scientific credentials are impeccable. This behavior by a medical licensing board is reminiscent of the methodology of the Soviet KGB during the period when dissidents were incarcerated in psychiatric gulags to silence their dissent.”

Read the rest of the article.

How to Remote Control Humans via Injection – Dr Charles Morgan Speaking to Cadets at West Point

From [HERE] Dr. Charles Morgan speaks to cadets and faculty at West Point about a range of topics, including psychology, neurobiology, and the science of humans at war. Dr. Morgan’s neurobiological and forensic research has established him as an international expert in post-traumatic stress disorder, eyewitness memory, and human performance under conditions of high stress.

CDC Bought Cell Phone Data to Track Americans During Lockdowns in the Free Range Prison

Story at a glance:

• A Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) revealed documentation that the organization had freely received, and later purchased, location data with the stated intent of monitoring activity in curfew zones or visits to pharmacies.

• A review of the documents also disclosed a list of 21 cases where the data could possibly be used, not all of which involved tracking COVID-related efforts. The data were gathered by SafeGraph after the company’s code was installed in a variety of apps commonly downloaded to smartphones.

• The data are reportedly anonymized, yet SafeGraph decided to no longer share data location about clinics that offer abortion services, which begs the question “Why?” if the data are anonymous?

• Google banned SafeGraph code in the Play Store in July 2021, just six months before four attorneys general filed a lawsuit after a three-year investigation showing Google has been secretly tracking people since 2014.

From [CHD] If you’ve ever felt like Google knows what you’re going to do before you know what you’re going to do, it’s because they are tracking you.

If you’re using any of Google’s apps or products on your Android phone, iPhone or computer, you are likely being tracked.

Internal documents from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) show your cell phone data was used to track your movements during lockdowns and vaccine campaigns.

CNET reports that some apps created by Google can store your location data and just opening the maps app or using a Google search will log your location and time.

Google analyzes the data to predict your behavior and sells the information to advertisers.

But advertisers are not the only ones interested in knowing where you are and what you’re doing.

As the pandemic unfolded in Australia, officials decided not to take the word of their citizens. Instead, citizens are forced to download an intrusive app that uses facial recognition and geolocation to ensure they stay quarantined in their homes.

In October 2021, The Guardian reported that human rights groups were concerned that the data being collected in Australia could be used for “secondary purposes” and stored for longer than necessary.

The Human Rights Law Center and Digital Rights Watch have expressed concern about the technology being used without privacy protections for their citizens.

The groups also expressed concerns that the information will be stored indefinitely rather than destroyed when there’s no reason for it to be retained.

China has taken the use of its citizens’ data one step further as they have developed measures to keep citizens in line with the party rhetoric.

Officially, the government is using facial recognition, shaming and brutality to enforce quarantines in the hope of achieving zero COVID cases, infections or deaths in the country.

In other words, China appears to be operating under the misguided belief that COVID is not endemic and can be controlled.

Yet, this is a highly unlikely story for a country with advanced technology and science laboratories. More likely, China and Australia are using these draconian methods to force submission and obedience on their citizens.

Internal documents reveal that the CDC may be in the early stages of something similarly tyrannical.

CDC pays for data to track your phone

On May 3, Vice reported that they’d learned through a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request that the CDC had purchased cell phone data from the data broker SafeGraph.

In early 2020, SafeGraph announced in their online blog that they’d made their “foot traffic data free for nonprofit organizations and government agencies at the local, state and federal level” — but, in addition, they also created “multiple new COVID-19 datasets and dashboards.”

They did this, they said, “to play our part in the fight against the COVID-19 health crisis — and its devastating impact on the global economy.”

One year later, SafeGraph, whose large investors include PayPal co-founder Peter Thiel and ex-Saudi intelligence chief Turki bin Faisal Al Saud, began charging for the data and the CDC paid $420,000 to the company.

The CDC said the data were “critical for ongoing response efforts, such as hourly monitoring of activity in curfew zones or detailed counts of visits to participating pharmacies for vaccine monitoring.”

Zach Edwards is a cyber-security researcher who commented to Vice Motherboard in an online chat after reading the documents from the CDC:

“The CDC seems to have purposefully created an open-ended list of use cases, which included monitoring curfews, neighbor-to-neighbor visits, visits to churches, schools and pharmacies, and also a variety of analysis with this data specifically focused on ‘violence.’”

In the documents obtained through the FOIA, the CDC described 21 cases in which they could potentially use the data that they had purchased.

Although the data were purchased to ostensibly track COVID data, not all were related to these efforts and it’s apparent someone was hoping to prove the effectiveness of CDC decisions through:

• Examination of the volume of mobile phones grouped in proximity each month and compare 2019 to 2020 data to see the impact of these orders. Project how much worse things would have been without the bans.

• Examination of the effectiveness of the public policy on Navajo Nation.

• Research points of interest such as visits to pharmacies in a vaccine distribution plan or grocery stores.

• Research points of interest for physical activity and chronic disease prevention such as visits to parks, gyms, or weight management businesses.

• Exposure to certain building types, urban areas, and violence.

SafeGraph defended its actions and data release by claiming it is an aggregate of information rather than specific to individuals to prevent issues with user privacy.

In the past, the company shared data on over 18 million cell phones they say were geographically representative.

They gather the data by asking or paying app developers to include the SafeGraph code. The location data is then funneled to SafeGraph, where they resell it or package the data into products.

SafeGraph claims that the data is anonymous, yet Vice Motherboard found otherwise after purchasing location data for $200 that was not supposed to pinpoint specific devices.

Edwards pointed out the data could be identified down to a specific office and theoretically specific users could also be identified.

This is not the first time the CDC has used the mobile cell phone network to gather data on the population. In 2010, they used it to identify population displacement and return after the earthquake in Haiti.

Their data analysis corresponded with a retrospective survey but was not reproduced in other natural disasters because of the limitations in gathering data from telecommunication companies.

SafeGraph seems to have circumvented this issue.

Google blocked SafeGraph

The concern that the location data may breach privacy was supported by SafeGraph’s decision in May to no longer share location data about clinics that offer abortion services.

Despite the long-standing claim that the data were anonymized, the company thought it was “good that we were called out.” and the decision was made “in light of potential federal changes in family planning access.”

How is it that SafeGraph believes the data sold to the CDC was anonymized, yet earlier that month they agreed to stop selling location data near health clinics that offer abortion services?

Is one more anonymous than the other?

The New York Post reported an example of how data have been able to be de-anonymized when a Catholic priest from Wisconsin was forced to resign after a Catholic news site was able to link data from his cell phone to dating apps.

The Post also reported that the internal documents from the CDC cell phone data revealed “extremely accurate insights related to age, gender, race, citizenship status, income and more.”

June 2021, Google banned SafeGraph code from their Play Store. Any developers who had it installed were required to either remove their app or remove the code.

Yet, this is likely not effective since, as Vice reports, SafeGraph has also gotten location data from a spin-off company that also works with app developers.

The intent to track user data was announced early in the pandemic by Bill Gates, who had gone on record saying that life would not go back to normal until we had the ability to vaccinate the entire global population against COVID-19.

To that end, he pushed for disease surveillance and a vaccine tracking system that could ultimately involve embedding vaccination records in our bodies.

The Rockefeller Foundation is also working on coordinating efforts of social control by implementing tracking and tracing measures that clearly are meant to become permanent.

On April 21, 2020, the Foundation released a white paper that called for testing and tracing all Americans using a national database that connects to other health records.

While these announcements are not obviously tied to data gathering by Google or other third parties, it’s also naive to think they can accomplish those goals without initially integrating data from the largest data source in the world — Google.

Google has been secretly tracking people

Google’s ban on SafeGraph code seems opposite to company policy and an interesting twist of events in 2021 since four attorneys general alleged in 2022 that the tech giant has secretly been tracking people without their knowledge or permission.

Karl A. Racine, attorney general for the District of Columbia, said in a statement, “The truth is that contrary to Google’s representations it continues to systematically surveil customers and profit from customer data.”

Racine led the complaints based on a three-year investigation that showed Google was recording movements even after users had indicated they didn’t want their movement tracked by changing settings on their device.

“Google falsely led consumers to believe that changing their account and device settings would allow customers to protect their privacy and control what personal data the company could access,” Racine said.

Racine initiated the investigation after a 2018 AP news report revealed Google was tracking people’s movements even when they opted out. His investigation found that these misleading claims regarding user privacy protection had been ongoing since at least 2014.

Yet, a Google spokesperson alleged that the lawsuit was based on “inaccurate claims and outdated assertions about our settings.”

The AP investigation included a real-world example from privacy researcher Gunes Acar, whose location data was tracked to dozens of locations over several days and the data saved to his Google account. Acar had turned off the “location history” on his cell phone.

In the past, Google location data had been used in criminal cases, including a warrant issued by police in Raleigh, North Carolina, to track down devices in the area of a murder.

It is reasonable to assume that Google has access to your location when your data and location are turned on. However, at issue is the company’s continued tracking even when location history is turned off.

“If you’re going to allow users to turn off something called ‘location history,’ then all the places where you maintain location history should be turned off,” Jonathan Mayer, a former chief technologist for the Federal Communications Commission’s enforcement bureau, told the AP. “That seems like a pretty straightforward position to have.”

Aside from hiding location tracking under settings users wouldn’t expect, like “Web & App Activity” — which is turned on by default — Google is accused of collecting and storing location information via Google services, Wi-Fi data and marketing partners, again after the device or account settings had been changed to stop location tracking.

Massachusetts and Google force installs tracking app

CNBC reported that efforts in Congress to monitor Big Tech have been stalled by “both partisan and inter-party squabbles,” while state attorneys general have shown a united front on issues against Facebook and Google.

When asked, Racine attributed the alignment to the relationship the AGs have with their constituents.

“State attorney generals are the people’s lawyers. And when acting as the people’s lawyers, they’re doing their best work. And they do their best work by frankly, engaging and listening to the residents of their jurisdictions.”

This remarkably resembles the way that Congressional men and women were elected to do their jobs.

Another signal that Google’s ban on SafeGraph code was not likely to protect user privacy was its partnership with the Massachusetts Department of Public Health and Apple to create a smartphone app called MassNotify.

The app tracks and traces people in Massachusetts and advises users of others’ COVID-19 status. The tool claimed to have been developed “with a focus on privacy.”

But Massachusetts residents were surprised when the app suddenly appeared on their Android phones without consent “to alert users who may have been exposed to COVID-19.”

Reportedly, the user must enable the feature for it to function, but the partnership with Google makes this claim suspect.

In China, COVID-19 tracking apps have been used as surveillance tools in collaboration with its social credit system, raising red flags that this force-installed app could be tracking residents’ movements and contacts without their knowledge and consent.

The MassNotify app uses Google’s and Apple’s Bluetooth-based Exposure Notifications Express program which was first released in April 2020. The program can act as a blueprint from which states can implement their own tracking systems.

Other states have required users to download the app, but MassNotify was integrated into the operating system of Android phones directly.

In a May 2020 Forbes article, Simon Chandler pointed out that while contact tracing apps “may be cryptographically secure,” they still “threaten our privacy in broader and more insidious ways,” namely encouraging you to keep your cellphone with you at all times and tracking your whereabouts while you do, further “normalizing” the constant use of technology to dictate your freedoms and behavior.

As has been demonstrated by investigations and Google’s actions, your smartphone can easily be used to track your location and possible actions.

This information can then be used to make predictions about your behavior and the likelihood you’ll make decisions that are for or against the current government dictates.

There are minimal steps left before people in currently “free” countries are living under constant surveillance, control and brutality as people in China and Australia find themselves. It is crucial to support your local and state government officials who support freedom.

"Im Not Going to Help You!" Video Shows White AZ Cops Watch a Black Man Drown to Death [Citizens Must Obey Laws but Cops Have No Duty to Protect Any Citizen. Makes you feel like a fool, doesn’t it?]

From [FTP] and [HERE] As Americans are quickly finding out after the horrifying shooting in Uvalde, Texas — during which police refused to go into the school to save the children — law enforcement has no legal duty to protect citizens. Case law going back decades in the Supreme Court has clearly established this premise and it has been used to defend cops who were charged over their cowardice. 

While there are certainly many police officers who will put themselves in harms way to do good and save lives, Uvalde, Parkland, and the following case out of Tempe, prove that there are still plenty of cops who will not.

According to the Tempe city government, police responded to a reported disturbance involving Sean Bickings, 34, and his wife. According to police, when they arrived, they spoke to Bickings and his companion, who cooperated fully and denied that any physical argument had taken place. Neither were being detained for any offense.

While police ran the couple’s names through a database to check for outstanding warrants, for some reason Bickings “decided to slowly climb over a 4-foot metal fence and enter the water” in Tempe Town Lake, according to a statement from the city. Police informed him that swimming wasn’t allowed in the lake — but Bickings wasn’t swimming — he was drowning.

As Bickings begged for help, he drifted away as police watched from safety. He would eventually go under and never resurface. Tempe Fire’s Dive and Rescue team would later find his body.

City Manager Andrew Ching and Police Chief Jeff Glover referred to Bickings’ death as a tragedy in the city’s statement. But it was more than that. It was a fatal reminder that police have no legal duty to protect life.

POLICE OFFICER’S FACES ARE BLURRED OUT TO PROTECT THE UNACCOUNTABLE SYSTEM OF AUTHORITY.

As FOX29 reports, in a transcript of conversations released by Tempe Police, an officer, only identified as ‘Officer 1,’ was noted as telling Bickings that he won’t be going into the lake.

“I’m drowning,” Bickings, noted as ‘victim’ in the transcript, said.

“Come back over to the pylon,” an officer, noted as ‘Officer 2′ in the transcript, said.

“I can’t. I can’t (inaudible),” said Bickings.

“OK, I’m not jumping in after you,” said Officer 1.

Instead of jumping in after Bickings, the officer threatened to detain his wife for being frantic.

“If you don’t calm down, I’m going to put you in my car,” the officer stated.

“I’m just distraught because he’s drowning right in front of him and you won’t help,” she said.

For several more minutes, Bickings’ wife begged the officers for help until he finally stayed under, never resurfacing.

According to the city’s statement, Tempe has asked the Department of Public Safety (DPS) and Scottsdale Police to examine the Tempe Police response to the drowning.

The three Tempe police officers who responded to the call and witnessed the drowning have been placed on non-disciplinary paid administrative leave pending the investigations, as is customary in critical incidents.

Although We Must Obey, the Supreme Ct Has Ruled COPS Have NO LEGAL DUTY to PROTECT. Who are the Mind and Gun Controlled Fools Here?

Police watching people drown and refusing to help is not that uncommon. As TFTP reported, Johnny “JJ” Baldwin, 24, suffered a similar fate in Franklin County, Tennessee.

According to police, they began pursuing Baldwin after they claimed he made a minor traffic violation. When Baldwin stopped, he ran before falling in Tims Ford Boiling Fork Creek.

Ten feet away as Baldwin took his last breaths, police taunted him as he drowned.

“Your dumb a** jumped in the river,” would be the last thing Baldwin would hear.

Media Liars Pretend Uvalde Cops Will Be Held Liable for Doing Nothing During Massacre. The Supreme Ct Has Ruled Cops Have No Legal Duty to Protect Any Particular Citizen ["the public duty doctrine"]

ACCORDING TO FUNKTIONARY

freedom peddlers – political agitators who fail to address the structured incapacity of most people for freedom and their inclination towards freedumb. Freedom peddlers talk about how free things are—but fail to mention the price of upkeep.

freedumb – the state of unrecognized psychological captivity (brain hemispheric hostage) that sheeple remain in because they don’t speak the language of reality nor constantly edit truth from perfecting heart to perfecting power—and when truth is spoken around them, refrain from being open, or impervious to it thus being forever chained to its distortions and limitations. 2) the mindset that proposes “since we are liberated, we are also free.” 3) the mindset that operates upon the notion that you can have individuality without accountability or responsibility. 4) the pretense that reality is truth and viceversa. People cherish unwarranted assumptions and relish their freedumb because they have been socialized into selfcensorship along with misidentification with the ego-mind—the absence of knowledge of Self. (See: Phfreedom, Truth, Unfreedom, Dumbelievers, Self, Belief Systems, Objective Truth, Individuality, Objective Reality, True Self & Reality)

DISARMED PEOPLE CAN’T SHOOT BACK AT THE GOVERNMENT OR PREVENT TYRANNY. DISARMED OR INADEQUATELY ARMED PEOPLE ARE SLAVES.

MIND YOUR WANTS BECAUSE UNCLE BROTHER WANTS YOUR MIND. MSNBC’s Laurence O’Donnell and other media hoaxed “journalists” and news entertainers continue to lie about how police in Uvalde will be held accountable for their failure to do anything to protect children during the so-called massacre. However, decades ago the Supreme Court ruled police have no legal duty to protected any victim from violence by other private parties unless the victim was in police custody. [MORE] and [MORE] This means that police cannot be sued for any federal constitutional claim for a failure to protect citizens. Unless a state negligence law exists allowing such a lawsuit, victims cannot hold police liable for a failure to protect from harm from private parties.

The only legal question for victims such as the ones in Ulvalde is whether the students were in the “custody” of the government during the “massacre.” In other mass shootings such as Parkland where a failure to protect children was claimed, the court ruled that students were not in “custody” and dismissed all claims against the police for a failure to protect students.

Said legal precedent applies regardless of circumstances such as whether police were present or aware of dangers - the Supreme Court has held that police have no legal duty to protect. Numerous federal and state courts have applied what is known as “the public duty doctrine.”

Despite reality concealment by puppeticians and their Dependent Media the public duty doctrine is a legal reality that, as explained by the DC Court of Appeals, is “well established” throughout the nation. Most recently in the so-called Parkland mass shooting a failure to protect children was claimed and then dismissed without controversy. A federal court ruled that students were not in “custody” and dismissed all claims.

The case of Warren v. District of Columbia, 444 A.2d 1 (1981), in which police were present and should have been aware of danger to the victims, clearly articulates the public duty doctrine. Read the facts of the case below, free your mind from Dependent Media idiocy:

In the early morning hours of March 16, 1975, appellants Carolyn Warren, Joan Taliaferro, and Miriam Douglas were asleep in their rooming house at 1112 Lamont Street, N.W. Warren and Taliaferro shared a room on the third floor of the house; Douglas shared a room on the second floor with her four-year-old daughter. The women were awakened by the sound of the back door being broken down by two men later identified as Marvin Kent and James Morse. The men entered Douglas' second floor room, where Kent forced Douglas to sodomize him and Morse raped her. Warren and Taliaferro heard Douglas' screams from the floor below. Warren telephoned the police, told the officer on duty that the house was being burglarized, and requested immediate assistance. The department employee told her to remain quiet and assured her that police assistance would be dispatched promptly. Warren's call was received at Metropolitan Police Department Headquarters at 6:23 a. m., and was recorded as a burglary in progress. At 6:26 a. m., a call was dispatched to officers on the street as a "Code 2" assignment, although calls of a crime in progress should be given priority and designated as "Code 1." Four police cruisers responded to the broadcast; three to the Lamont Street address and one to another address to investigate a possible suspect.

Meanwhile, Warren and Taliaferro crawled from their window onto an adjoining roof and waited for the police to arrive. While there, they saw one policeman drive through the alley behind their house and proceed to the front of the residence without stopping, leaning out the window, or getting out of the car to check the back entrance of the house. A second officer apparently knocked on the door in front of the residence, but left when he received no answer. The three officers departed the scene at 6:33 a. m., five minutes after they arrived.

Warren and Taliaferro crawled back inside their room. They again heard Douglas' continuing screams; again called the police; told the officer that the intruders had entered the home, and requested immediate assistance. Once again, a police officer assured them that help was on the way. This second call was received at 6:42 a. m. and recorded merely as "investigate the trouble" — it was never dispatched to any police officers.

Believing the police might be in the house, Warren and Taliaferro called down to Douglas, thereby alerting Kent to their presence. Kent and Morse then forced all three women, at knifepoint, to accompany them to Kent's apartment. For the next fourteen hours the women were held captive, raped, robbed, beaten, forced to commit sexual acts upon each other, and made to submit to the sexual demands of Kent and Morse.

Denying all claims of liability against the government and the police for a failure to protect the victims the court explained,

“the District of Columbia appears to follow the well established rule that official police personnel and the government employing them are not generally liable to victims of criminal acts for failure to provide adequate police protection.

This uniformly accepted rule rests upon the fundamental principle that a government and its agents are under no general duty to provide public services, such as police protection, to any particular individual citizen.

A publicly maintained police force constitutes a basic governmental service provided to benefit the community at large by promoting public peace, safety and good order. The extent and quality of police protection afforded to the community necessarily depends upon the availability of public resources and upon legislative or administrative determinations concerning allocation of those resources. Riss v. City of New York, supra. The public, through its representative officials, recruits, trains, maintains and disciplines its police force and determines the manner in which personnel are deployed. At any given time, publicly furnished police protection may accrue to the personal benefit of individual citizens, but at all times the needs and interests of the community at large predominate. Private resources and needs have little direct effect upon the nature of police services provided to the public. Accordingly, courts have without exception concluded that when a municipality or other governmental entity undertakes to furnish police services, it assumes a duty only to the public at large and not to individual members of the community.”

The Supreme Court has also ruled that police are not liable under the Due Process clause for a failure to protect even where the police are have adopted a department policy of non-action. In Castle Rock v. Gonzales, 545 U.S. 748 (2005), the Court explained that police have broad discretion to arrest people whenever they want to; even when a court’s restraining order has explicitly ordered the arrest of a violator (as it did in that case) the police have discretion as to whether they will or not arrest.

So, what the fuck is the dependent media talking about? Uncle Brother is after your mind.

The illusion of accountable police helps to sell propaganda to disarm citizens. Most importantly it sells the statist myth of a social contract between citizens and government. Said myth is the basis of all political authority. The “clogic” is ‘people don’t need guns because the police will protect them.’ Such belief is also part of other woefully ignorant “propagenda” such as ‘guns are primarily for hunting’ or primarily for self defense.  Contrary to indoctrination from freedumb advocates in the dependent media, the 2nd Amendment exists for when all other rights have failed. An armed population is necessary to check authority and tyranny. As stated by 9th circuit judge Alex Kozinski,

“tyranny thrives best where government need not fear the wrath of an armed people. Our own sorry history bears this out: Disarmament was the tool of choice for subjugating both slaves and free blacks in the South. In Florida, patrols searched blacks' homes for weapons, confiscated those found and punished their owners without judicial process. In the North, by contrast, blacks exercised their right to bear arms to defend against racial mob violence. As Chief Justice Taney well appreciated, the institution of slavery required a class of people who lacked the means to resist. A revolt by Nat Turner and a few dozen other armed blacks could be put down without much difficulty; one by four million armed blacks would have meant big trouble.

All too many of the other great tragedies of history—Stalin's atrocities, the killing fields of Cambodia, the Holocaust, to name but a few—were perpetrated by armed troops against unarmed populations. Many could well have been avoided or mitigated, had the perpetrators known their intended victims were equipped with a rifle and twenty bullets apiece, as the Militia Act required here. If a few hundred Jewish fighters in the Warsaw Ghetto could hold off the Wehrmacht for almost a month with only a handful of weapons, six million Jews armed with rifles could not so easily have been herded into cattle cars.

. . . The prospect of tyranny may not grab the headlines the way vivid stories of gun crime routinely do. But few saw the Third Reich coming until it was too late. The Second Amendment is a doomsday provision, one designed for those exceptionally rare circumstances where all other rights have failed—where the government refuses to stand for reelection and silences those who protest; where courts have lost the courage to oppose, or can find no one to enforce their decrees. However improbable these contingencies may seem today, facing them unprepared is a mistake a free people get to make only once.” Silveira v. Lockyer, 328 F.3d 567, 569-570 (9th Cir. 2003) quoted in FUNKTIONARY

Sound far fetched? Brazen cops so frequently abuse their uncontrollable powers that no Black person could make a rational argument that so-called 4th Amendment rights afford any meaningful protection from cops. Cops interfere with Black people’s freedom of movement and right to be left alone any time they desire. Said situation can get worse - already, police in these white, friendly liberal run territories aren’t protecting black people, they surveil and kill them; Minneapolis, Chicago, NYC, Houston, Baltimore, Kansas City, St. Louis etc.

In reality, Citizens with no guns or less guns or inferior guns are much easier to control and dominate.

It should go without saying but criminals are criminals because they are willing to break laws/commit crimes. Laws, including gun laws, do not alter the conduct of mass murderers or prevent them from getting or using guns. Mr. X is ready to kill anybody in sight but he will obey gun laws? Gun laws simply prevent law abiding citizens from obtaining weapons, nothing more.

A responsible, capable and intelligent citizen should be ready and able to defend himself and come to the defense of others when necessary, especially because the police have no legal obligation to do so. Who would think that under the most violent terroristic circumstances such as an alleged “madman” murdering children, the police would choose not to offer protection?

Lax gun laws? How about an unaccountable government that can’t protect even the most vulnerable citizens unable to defend themselves? Rather than take guns away from people, it is rational for more people to arm themselves and be accountable for protecting themselves and their community; you should have the right to shoot back especially since vaginal cops have no legal obligation to protect you. [MORE]

Disarming law abiding Black people prevents them from being able to defend themselves against criminals and the government. As such, gun controls and gun bans disempower Black people and readily subject Black communities to police and criminal violence, rendering Blacks helpless, solely dependent and slave-like in their relations with government authorities who prey on them and control them under the pretense of protection. It is obvious that one of Uncle Brother’s goal is for all citizens to relinquish individual responsibility for defending themselves and to depend upon their public masters to do so in their provision of “public service” that cannot be refused.

Discussing such authoritarian programming, Larken Rose states,

One of the main problems that the peasants must be trained not to deal with themselves is violent conflict. It is imperative that they view you (and your enforcers) as the only protection against rob­bery, assault, and murder. In short, they must be indoctrinated in such a way that they do not even want to be able to defend them­selves. The reason is simple: if the peasants feel capable and enti­tled to "enforce justice" themselves, they might just decide to enforce a little justice against you. And that obviously won't do. 

They must be trained to give up their belief in their right to defend themselves, which is not an easy thing to do. You must attack "peasant justice" in any ways you can think of, such as: 1) '"Vigilante justice can never be as just or fair as our system"; 2) '"You can't possibly protect yourselves; let us do it"; 3) "If you have a gun. you 'II only hurt yourself: 4) "'If the peasants were allowed to use force, there would be chaos'"; 5) "Private protection agen­cies would just deteriorate into competing gangs of thugs"; and so on. Often privately-enforced justice is referred to as the people "taking the law into their own hands" which reinforces the idea that only enforcers of "the law" should ever use force, and of course the lowly peasants can't be allowed to do that." [MORE]

In a Step Toward a Humane Civilization, Zambia’s President Calls for Abolishing the Death Penalty and Pardons Thousands

From [EJI] Zambian President Hakainde Hichilema announced Tuesday that his government has made a “big decision” to end the death penalty in Zambia.

“We will work with Parliament to run this process as we transition away from the death penalty and focus on the preservation and rehabilitation of life while still delivering justice for all,” he said in a video on the eve of Africa Freedom Day—a holiday that symbolizes “our collective commitment to secure a better future for all.”

President Hichilema also announced that he has pardoned 2,652 people detained in various correctional facilities and commuted the death sentences of 30 people to life in prison.

“We believe in showing strength through our compassion,” the president said, “and we believe in rights for all citizens, including the right to life.”

“This is important,” he said. “We believe in it.”

The government has also started to address overcrowding in the nation’s prisons through programs like community sentencing alternatives for minor offenses, Acting Minister of Home Affairs and Internal Security Ambrose Lifuna toldAfricanews.

In a statement today, the office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights welcomed the announcement as “a major step forward for human rights” in Zambia.

The Human Rights Office urged lawmakers to quickly and explicitly prohibit the death penalty in the nation’s penal code, criminal procedure code, and constitution.

Zambia has not carried out any executions since 1997, but its courts continue to sentence people to death. At least nine death sentences were imposed last year, including mandatory death sentences for aggravated robbery, Amnesty International reported this week.

Amnesty’s annual death penalty report noted that, despite at least 269 commutations of death sentences and three exonerations from death row last year, 257 people were known to be under a sentence of death in Zambia at the end of 2021.

President Hichilema’s pledge to abolish capital punishment adds to a growing global consensus for universal abolition of the death penalty, the UN Human Rights Office observed. It encouraged the government to ratify the Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights on the abolition of the death penalty.

More than two-thirds of the world’s countries had abolished the death penalty in law or practice by the end of 2021, according to Amnesty. It reports that 108 countries—a majority of the world’s states—had abolished the death penalty in law for all crimes and 144 countries had abolished the death penalty in law or practice, while only 55 countries still retained the death penalty at the end of last year.

Two Black lawyers plead guilty to new charges for throwing Molotov cocktail into police car during protest

From [HERE] Two New York lawyers have pleaded guilty to new charges as part of a plea deal for throwing a Molotov cocktail into a police car during a 2020 George Floyd protest. This case is in the US District Court for the Eastern District of New York.

Urooj Rahman and Colinford Mattis pleaded guilty last year to one count of making and possessing a destructive device. Under the revised agreement sent to US District Judge Brian Cogan, they were charged with conspiracy to commit arson and possess an explosive device. As part of the deal, the government will recommend a sentence of 18-24 months of imprisonment. US Attorney  for the Eastern District of New York Breon Peace wrote the agreement letter.

In the agreement letter, prosecutors said that 18-24 month terms reflected the “nature and circumstances of the offense and the histories and personal characteristics of these defendants.”

During the protest, Rahman threw a Molotov cocktail through an empty police car’s broken window and fled in a vehicle driven by Mattis. As a result of the guilty pleas entered Thursday, both defendants will lose their law licenses.

Bilderberg Elites [members of the Pathocracy] Met in DC Last Week

From [HERE] The 68th Bilderberg Meeting will take place from 2 – 5 June 2022 in Washington, D.C., USA. About 120 participants from 21 countries have confirmed their attendance. As ever, a diverse group of political leaders and experts from industry, finance, academia, labour and the media has been invited. The list of participants is available on bilderbergmeetings.org.

The key topics for discussion this year are:

1. Geopolitical Realignments
2. NATO Challenges
3. China
4. Indo-Pacific Realignment
5. Sino-US Tech Competition
6. Russia
7. Continuity of Government and the Economy
8. Disruption of the Global Financial System
9. Disinformation
10. Energy Security and Sustainability
11. Post Pandemic Health
12. Fragmentation of Democratic Societies
13. Trade and Deglobalisation
14. Ukraine

Founded in 1954, the Bilderberg Meeting is an annual conference designed to foster dialogue between Europe and North America. Every year, between 120-140 political leaders and experts from industry, finance, labour, academia and the media are invited to take part in the Meeting. About two thirds of the participants come from Europe and the rest from North America; approximately a quarter from politics and government and the rest from other fields.

The Bilderberg Meeting is a forum for informal discussions about major issues. The meetings are held under the Chatham House Rule, which states that participants are free to use the information received, but neither the identity nor the affiliation of the speaker(s) nor any other participant may be revealed.

Thanks to the private nature of the Meeting, the participants take part as individuals rather than in any official capacity, and hence are not bound by the conventions of their office or by pre-agreed positions. As such, they can take time to listen, reflect and gather insights. There is no detailed agenda, no resolutions are proposed, no votes are taken and no policy statements are issued.

Bilderberg Attendees 2022

Achleitner, Paul M. (DEU), Former Chairman Supervisory Board, Deutsche Bank AG; Treasurer Bilderberg Meetings

Adeyemo, Adewale (USA), Deputy Secretary, Department of  The Treasury

Albares, José Manuel (ESP), Minister of Foreign Affairs, European Union and Cooperation

Altman, Roger C. (USA), Founder and Senior Chairman, Evercore Inc.

Altman, Sam (USA), CEO, OpenAI

Applebaum, Anne (USA), Staff Writer, The Atlantic

Arnaut, José Luís (PRT), Managing Partner, CMS Rui Pena & Arnaut

Auken, Ida (DNK), Member of Parliament, The Social Democrat Party

Azoulay, Audrey (INT), Director-General, UNESCO

Baker, James H. (USA), Director, Office of Net Assessment, Office of the Secretary of Defense

Barbizet, Patricia (FRA), Chairwoman and CEO, Temaris & Associés SAS

Barroso, José Manuel (PRT), Chairman, Goldman Sachs International LLC

Baudson, Valérie (FRA), CEO, Amundi

Beurden, Ben van (NLD), CEO, Shell plc

Bourla, Albert (USA), Chairman and CEO, Pfizer Inc.

Buberl, Thomas (FRA), CEO, AXA SA

Burns, William J. (USA), Director, CIA

Byrne, Thomas (IRL), Minister of State for European Affairs

Campbell, Kurt (USA), White House Coordinator for Indo-Pacific, NSC

Carney, Mark J. (CAN), Vice Chair, Brookfield Asset Management

Casado, Pablo (ESP), Former President, Partido Popular

Chhabra, Tarun (USA), Senior Director for Technology and National Security, National Security Council

Donohoe, Paschal (IRL), Minister for Finance; President, Eurogroup

Döpfner, Mathias (DEU), Chairman and CEO, Axel Springer SE

Dudley, William C. (USA), Senior Research Scholar, Princeton University

Easterly, Jen (USA), Director, Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency

Economy, Elizabeth (USA), Senior Advisor for China, Department of Commerce

Émié, Bernard (FRA), Director General, Ministry of the Armed Forces

Emond, Charles (CAN), CEO, CDPQ

Erdogan, Emre (TUR), Professor Political Science, Istanbul Bilgi University

Eriksen, Øyvind (NOR), President and CEO, Aker ASA

Ermotti, Sergio (CHE), Chairman, Swiss Re

Fanusie, Yaya (USA), Adjunct Senior Fellow, Center for a New American Security

Feltri, Stefano (ITA), Editor-in-Chief, Domani

Fleming, Jeremy (GBR), Director, British Government Communications Headquarters

Freeland, Chrystia (CAN), Deputy Prime Minister

Furtado, Isabel (PRT), CEO, TMG Automotive

Gove, Michael (GBR), Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Cabinet Office

Halberstadt, Victor (NLD), Co-Chair Bilderberg Meetings; Professor of Economics, Leiden University

Hallengren, Lena (SWE), Minister for Health and Social Affairs

Hamers, Ralph (NLD), CEO, UBS Group AG

Hassabis, Demis (GBR), CEO and Founder, DeepMind

Hedegaard, Connie (DNK), Chair, KR Foundation

Henry, Mary Kay (USA), International President, Service Employees International Union

Hobson, Mellody (USA), Co-CEO and President, Ariel Investments LLC

Hodges, Ben (USA), Pershing Chair in Strategic Studies, Center for European Policy Analysis

Hoekstra, Wopke (NLD), Minister of Foreign Affairs

Hoffman, Reid (USA), Co-Founder, Inflection AI; Partner, Greylock

Huët, Jean Marc (NLD), Chairman, Heineken NV

Joshi, Shashank (GBR), Defence Editor, The Economist

Karp, Alex (USA), CEO, Palantir Technologies Inc.

Kissinger, Henry A. (USA), Chairman, Kissinger Associates Inc.

Koç, Ömer (TUR), Chairman, Koç Holding AS

Kofman, Michael (USA), Director, Russia Studies Program, Center for Naval Analysis

Kostrzewa, Wojciech (POL), President, Polish Business Roundtable

Krasnik, Martin (DNK), Editor-in-Chief, Weekendavisen

Kravis, Henry R. (USA), Co-Chairman, KKR & Co. Inc.  

Kravis, Marie-Josée (USA), Co-Chair Bilderberg Meetings; Chair, The Museum of Modern Art

Kudelski, André (CHE), Chairman and CEO, Kudelski Group SA

Kukies, Jörg (DEU), State Secretary, Chancellery

Lammy, David (GBR), Shadow Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, House of Commons

LeCun, Yann (USA), Vice-President and Chief AI Scientist, Facebook, Inc.

Leu, Livia (CHE), State Secretary, Federal Department of Foreign Affairs

Leysen, Thomas (BEL), Chairman, Umicore and Mediahuis; Chairman DSM N.V.

Liikanen, Erkki (FIN), Chairman, IFRS  Foundation Trustees

Little, Mark (CAN), President and CEO, Suncor Energy Inc.

Looney, Bernard (GBR), CEO, BP plc

Lundstedt, Martin (SWE), CEO and President, Volvo Group

Lütke, Tobias (CAN), CEO, Shopify

Marin, Sanna (FIN), Prime Minister

Markarowa, Oksana (UKR), Ambassador of Ukraine to the US

Meinl-Reisinger, Beate (AUT), Party Leader, NEOS

Michel, Charles (INT), President, European Council

Minton Beddoes, Zanny (GBR), Editor-in-Chief, The Economist

Mullen, Michael (USA), Former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

Mundie, Craig J. (USA), President, Mundie & Associates LLC

Netherlands, H.M. the King of the (NLD)

Niemi, Kaius (FIN), Senior Editor-in-Chief, Helsingin Sanomat Newspaper

Núñez, Carlos (ESP), Executive Chairman, PRISA Media

O’Leary, Michael (IRL), Group CEO, Ryanair Group

Papalexopoulos, Dimitri (GRC), Chairman, TITAN Cement Group

Petraeus, David H. (USA), Chairman, KKR Global Institute

Pierrakakis, Kyriakos (GRC), Minister of Digital Governance

Pinho, Ana (PRT), President and CEO, Serralves Foundation

Pouyanné, Patrick (FRA), Chairman and CEO, TotalEnergies SE

Rachman, Gideon (GBR), Chief Foreign Affairs Commentator, The Financial Times

Raimondo, Gina M. (USA), Secretary of Commerce

Reksten Skaugen, Grace (NOR), Board Member, Investor AB

Rende, Mithat (TUR), Member of the Board, TSKB

Reynders, Didier (INT), European Commissioner for Justice

Rutte, Mark (NLD), Prime Minister

Salvi, Diogo (PRT), Co-Founder and CEO, TIMWE

Sawers, John (GBR), Executive Chairman, Newbridge Advisory Ltd.

Schadlow, Nadia (USA), Senior Fellow, Hudson Institute

Schinas, Margaritis (INT), Vice President, European Commission

Schmidt, Eric E. (USA), Former CEO and Chairman, Google LLC

Scott, Kevin (USA), CTO, Microsoft Corporation

Sebastião, Nuno (PRT), CEO, Feedzai

Sedwill, Mark (GBR), Chairman, Atlantic Futures Forum

Sikorski, Radoslaw (POL), MEP, European Parliament

Sinema, Kyrsten (USA), Senator

Starace, Francesco (ITA), CEO, Enel S.p.A.

Stelzenmüller, Constanze (DEU), Fritz Stern Chair, The Brookings Institution

Stoltenberg, Jens (INT), Secretary General, NATO

Straeten, Tinne Van der (BEL), Minister for Energy

Suleyman, Mustafa (GBR), CEO, Inflection AI

Sullivan, Jake (USA), Director, National Security Council

Tellis, Ashley J. (USA), Tata Chair for Strategic Affairs, Carnegie Endowment

Thiel, Peter (USA), President, Thiel Capital LLC

Treichl, Andreas (AUT), President, Chairman ERSTE Foundation

Tugendhat, Tom (GBR), MP; Chair Foreign Affairs Committee, House of Commons

Veremis, Markos (GRC), Co-Founder and Chairman, Upstream

Vitrenko, Yuriy (UKR), CEO, Naftogaz

Wallander, Celeste (USA), Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs

Wallenberg, Marcus (SWE), Chair, Skandinaviska Enskilda Banken AB

Walmsley, Emma (GBR), CEO, GlaxoSmithKline plc

Wennink, Peter (NLD), President and CEO, ASML Holding NV

Yetkin, Murat (TUR), Journalist/Writer, YetkinReport

Yurdakul, Afsin (TUR), Journalist, Habertürk News Network