Seattle Police Killed More People while Under Federal Oversight, according to data analysis of Cops in white, liberal city

/

From [HERE] A data scientist says she’s found evidence that Seattle police killings have worsened since the federal government began monitoring the department a decade ago, an analysis that was criticized by a federal monitor just before a critical decision on the future of that oversight.

Sherry Towers, a data scientist who studies violence and extremism, says she wasn’t initially looking into Seattle police violence in particular when she came across the data.

But what she found alarmed her enough to send her findings to U.S. District Judge James Robart before a May 30 hearing that could result in the end of most federal oversight through the city’s decade-old consent decree.

Antonio Oftelie, who was appointed by Robart to monitor the Seattle Police Department’s compliance with the consent decree, said he welcomed input from community members, but he criticized key aspects of Towers’ analysis as “misleading” in a memo sent to the court.

At issue is a difference of opinion between consent decree stakeholders and Towers about how much police use of force is too much — and whether the city has done enough to leave federal oversight behind.

Towers, who is known for her 2015 study looking at the contagion effect of mass shootings, stands by the letter she sent to Robart on May 20, which claimed that Seattle’s rate of police shootings is significantly higher than elsewhere in the country. She started looking at national police killings data as part of a Department of Homeland Security-funded project, and she mentioned to a colleague following the progress of the consent decree that King County’s rate seemed higher than average.

Towers then used public data from Seattle police, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the FBI, as well as The Washington Post’s police shooting database, to conclude that about 1 in 10 people who have died by homicide in Seattle between 2013 and 2019 have been killed by a police officer.

“I could have just looked at the data and seen everything had gotten better, and that also would’ve warranted an email to the judge to say, just FYI, I’m a data analyst with experience in looking at crime data, and the data that I look at supports what the Seattle PD is saying,” Towers said. “But that’s not what I found.”

In his memo responding to Towers’ email, Oftelie said Towers’ analysis could not explain whether the shootings were justified. The vast majority of force assessed by the monitor found that it complied with the consent decree, he wrote.

When asked for comment, the police department referred The Seattle Times to the federal monitor’s memo, and said that it had made improvements in data transparency as a result of the consent decree.

In March, city of Seattle and Department of Justice lawyers asked Robart to find the Police Department in “substantial compliance” with the consent decree, established in 2012 after investigators found evidence of biased policing and that the department regularly used excessive force.

The city cited the federal monitor’s report showing a 60% decrease in use of the most serious types of force — including shootings — between 2014 and 2021.

Towers, however, said that fatal police shootings specifically have increased since the consent decree was established, and that racial disparities have gotten worse. She found that in the seven years before the 2012 settlement, Seattle police fatally shot 12 people, but between 2013 and 2019, officers killed 21 people. (The most recent year of SPD’s shootings-specific database available to the public is 2019.) Over the same time period, she also found that the percentage of fatal shootings of nonwhite people increased.

The American Civil Liberties Union of Washington filed a brief in the consent decree case making similar arguments about continued racial disparities in policing. The organization cited SPD’s 2019 use of force report that showed force was used on people of color more than 50% of the time, despite the city being 65% white.

Oftelie said in a Thursday interview he agrees racial disparities remained “an area of challenge that the city must continuously address.” He said he believes Seattle is now at the forefront of trying to figure out the root causes of those disparities — and is tracking data on them, unlike many police departments.

Oftelie also said it was important not to overlook a reduction in more common, lower-level types of force, which he sees as a good indicator of a change in Seattle police culture. That kind of force decreased by 48% from 2015 to 2021, though it spiked in 2018.

“Historically throughout the country, lower levels of force have been used to intimidate people, to make them not feel comfortable in certain communities, to send a signal from police to community,” Oftelie said.

“And so if you can reduce type one force as dramatically as Seattle has, that shows a real difference in culture, in policing, a difference in mindset in policing, because cops on the street with type one force, there’s deliberation there.”

Yet the federal monitor did not address Towers’ main point — that the share of police killings out of overall homicides in Seattle is worse compared with much of the rest of the country, and more than double the national average. Making comparisons to other jurisdictions was out of his purview, Oftelie said, and homicides aren’t a good proxy for how often situations involving a police shooting might occur.

The Seattle Times contacted five academics who study police violence, and all had different preferred methods for measuring it. Two said that Seattle’s rate of police violence compared with other cities nationwide is elevated, and another said this is true of police agencies across the West.

“The raw numbers indicate Seattle has a kind of high police homicide rate and could do better,” said Dan O’Flaherty, professor of urban economics at Columbia University.

‘I want my left eye back’: Protestors Silenced by Police Violence Speak Out. In 2020 Cops in Liberal Cities Violently Silenced the Speech of People who Begged Authorities to Stop Killing Black People

/

From [HERE] “You don’t recover from something like this. That’s not a thing you do,” said journalist Linda Tirado, who was partially blinded after being fired on by the police while covering the protests that engulfed Minneapolis for months after George Floyd was slowly murdered in plain public view by a senior police officer in the city.

Tirado is one of many who were injured in the protests that year and won a legal case against the city, which has already agreed to pay out at least $5.1m in settlements to demonstrators – using city funds – and is estimated to be facing an additional $100m more in potential payouts as a result of lawsuits.

Her settlement is just one of many that add up to what experts deem a record level of payouts across the US as a result of violent policing of the 2020 protests, with probably many more to come.

While photographing demonstrations, Tirado says an officer shot a projectile at her face. Bleeding profusely, Tirado was taken by protesters to a nearby hospital where she was rushed into surgery, but lost the sight in one eye.

She now deals with short-term memory loss, a lack of depth perception and other health issues. She can no longer drive and has trouble with simple tasks like cooking. She was awarded $600,000 by the city in May 2022, the Minnesota Reformer reported. The funds addressed her medical debt, but not the long-lasting impacts on her work and life.

“There is no [appropriate] amount. Because you know what I want? I want my left eye back,” Tirado said.

She added that the settlement legal process was emotionally invasive and traumatic and called the undertaking “the hardest thing you’ll ever do”.

During the mass demonstrations across the country against police violence, police injured many and, like Tirado, some were severely wounded by so-called “less-than-lethal” weapons, including rubber bullets and beanbag projectiles.

In a global report by Amnesty International, the organization said countries around the world, including the US, increasingly use ammunition against peaceful protesters that is less dangerous than actual bullets but can still cause permanent injury or death.

Anthony Evans said he was shot in the jaw by police firing just such a less-than-lethal round as he took part in a Black Lives Matter protest in Austin, Texas.

“We were never, like, cussing or yelling in their face or anything. It was all just peaceful,” said Evans.

Officers refused to provide Evans with medical assistance, he said. He walked seven miles home and drove himself to the hospital.

He was hospitalized for nearly a week and a half then endured several surgeries and an infection after doctors initially mistreated his shattered jaw, he said.

“It was a very arduous journey of just going through surgery after surgery,” said Evans, who ultimately had his jaw wired shut for more than five months and could only consume liquids.

He concluded: “Unfortunately, we were down there protesting police brutality – and we were met with more brutality by the police.”

Evans and other injured protesters in the city who sued have received a total of $17.3m in settlements so far, the Austin American-Statesman reported, and 19 Austin officers were indicted.

In New York, the city and its police department have agreed to pay upwards of $6m total to 320 protesters who were subject to excessive force during a June 2020 protest in a Bronx neighborhood – including being zip-tied, hit with batons and pepper-sprayed – while the police were surrounding and squeezing them together using a technique known as “kettling”.

The violence unleashed upon us that night was intentional, unwarranted and will be with me for the rest of my life

“The violence unleashed upon us that night was intentional, unwarranted and will be with me for the rest of my life,” said Charles Henry Wood, one of the plaintiffs, in a March statement.

Plaintiff Samira Sierra told New York magazine she was body-slammed by six officers and she remembers screams from protesters and then people passing out around her as they were crushed in.

Meanwhile, in Chicago, Jonathan Ballew, who reported on the protests there, said the lack of change within policing practices was the most difficult part of his experience.

Ballew was pepper-sprayed by a Chicago police officer. He later received $40,000 as part of a $115,000 settlement, along with another journalist. Separately, 60 protesters have filed a federal lawsuit against Chicago police officers, alleging abuse during the 2020 protests, the Chicago Tribune reported.

Ballew noted that police spending had sharply increased for many police departments and more people were actually killed by police after 2020 racial justice protests than in previous years.

“The increased police budgets, surveillance and police violence all seem to be back on the rise. It’s pretty disappointing,” he said, adding: “It seems like we’re repeating the same mistakes that led us to George Floyd.”

Its Now a Felony to Kill a Police Dog in Florida [like cops, K9's are Also Exempt from Normal Rules of Human Morality and Can Do Things that would be recognized as Unlawful if anyone else did them]

/

From [HERE] The Sunshine State is awful choosy about the lives it values within its borders. As for dogs, governor Ron DeSantis recently passed a law making it a felony to harm a K9, one that carries a maximum sentence of up to 15 years. Let me be clear, it should be a felony to kill a dog, whether that dog is a narc or not. The irony is that Florida’s police officers (and U.S. police officers in general) kill dogs all of the time, particularly dogs that live with residents of impoverished and over-policed communities.

The University of New Hampshire Law Review estimates that police officers across America kill an estimated 10,000 pet dogs while on duty each year. However, it is nearly impossible to obtain an accurate estimate because law enforcement agencies hardly ever bother to keep an accurate count of the amount of dogs they kill. While many cops claim that the decision to shoot a dog in the line of duty is usually a split-second decision made in self-defense, records show that many of these dogs are killed when officers “mistake the behavior of a friendly, curious dog for aggression.”[MORE]

The "White Marine's 15 Min Chokehold" May be Fake but his Record Setting Defense Fund is Real Proof Racists Believe Deadly Force Can Be Used on NGHRS when There is No Threat of Serious Bodily Harm

/

THE LATINO MAN WHO FILMED THE INCIDENT SAID THE “WHITE MARINE” PUT “JORDAN NEELY” IN A “15 MINUTE CHOKEHOLD” BY GRABBING HIM FROM BEHIND. AS SUCH, “THE WHITE MARINE” COULD HAVE ONLY BEEN ACTING IN SELF-DEFENSE OF OTHERS (NOT HIMSELF) WHEN HE USED DEADLY FORCE. THUS FAR, NO SPECIFIC FACTS INDICATE THAT NEELY PUT ANY PARTICULAR PASSENGER IN IMMINENT (MEANING IMMEDIATE) FEAR OF SERIOUS BODILY HARM. EVEN IF SUCH FACTS EXIST, ONCE THE THREAT DISSIPATED, DEADLY FORCE WAS NO LONGER JUSTIFIED. CLEARLY, NO ONE IN THE VIDEO IS FACING ANY HARM FROM NEELY.

THE “KILL A NGHR EXCEPTION” TO THE LAW OF SELF-DEFENSE. According to the co-founder of GiveSendGo, a crowdfunding platform, the so-called “Marine veteran Daniel Penny’s” legal fees campaign related to the “15 minute chokehold” incident involving the death of “Jordan Neely” on a “crowded” New York City subway has become one of the platform’s most successful fundraisers ever.

“It’s the No. 2 ever on GiveSendGo,” CFO Jacob Wells told Fox News Digital. “This definitely has sparked an emotional response with many people.”

Wells noted that at one point the fund was bringing in $1,000 per minute after Penny was charged with second-degree manslaughter by Manhattan prosecutors.

The legal defense fund has already raised more than $2.7 million. [MORE]

A TALE TOLD IN ACCORD WITH THE BELIEFS OF BOTH THE RACIST AND THE WOKE VIEWER IS ONE THAT THEY BOTH WANT TO BELIEVE. Besides a 3 minute video, all the information about the incident is actually only coming from the NYPD. The NYPD is relaying hearsay from unnamed witnesses to the media who parrot the information to the viewing public. However, actual first hand witness accounts from persons who were present before and during the so-called 15 minute chokehold have not been presented by the media. All media info so far is just “according to police” and “witnesses reportedly said.” As we know the NYPD are liars.

BW is not yet asserting that this is a false flag but so far it shares some false flaggot characteristics - particularly with the lack of video despite the presence of a large number of people, lack of first hand witness accounts, reliance on police accounts, instant biographies and mini-media stories/photos created for the villain “white marine” and the victim “homeless Black man” ‘who impersonated Michael Jackson.’ Also, not so sure “a 15 minute chokehold” is actually possible. Some people become unconscious in three to four seconds. If the flow continues to be restricted, a person can die within three to four minutes. [MORE] Here, a chokehold by a so-called Marine, evidently trained in strangulation and combat methods, was applied for 15 minutes to an unwell, frail, weak,“homeless Black man” who couldn’t have weighed more than 150 lbs. Sounds like it might be some bullshit. Like false flags, while glossing over details the Dependent media and police are only focusing on the emotive facts; protests from lathered-up liberals and rants by lathered-up racist suspect conservatives. One should be cautious especially where police and media present facts in accord with the appetite of the listener, not necessarily in accord with reality.

Why would police or media make it up? Many reasons -but mostly because sheeple will believe it and use their imaginations to fill in the missing details in accord with their beliefs and dogma. As explained by Osho Rajineesh, 'a mind that is filled with belief is a mind which can project anything according to that belief.' FUNKTIONARY explains, “belief” is any conclusion based on a fundamental assumption; the evidence of things not seen, no longer actively sought or belief is the psychological calm of imagined certitude safely beyond de-stabilizing doubt and troublesome reality-entanglement. [MORE]

The Nashville Shooter Either: 1) Changed Shoes During the Massacre or 2) Wore the Same Shoes or 3) It was a False Flag. Release of the Journal is Distraction, All the Public's Video Should be Released

/

Is Another Juneteenth Necessary? NBA Elites and Their B'Ignorant Massa’bators Crucify Ja Morant Over Gun Possession but Tennessee Protects the Right to Carry Guns, open and concealed, w/o a permit

/

ABOVE SNIGGER SHANNON. WHEN HE’S NOT OVER INDULGING IN LEBRONSEXUALITIS OR PROMOTING THE ONGOING SMILING FACE, HE’S SHADOWBOXING JA MORANT OR ANY OTHER BLACK INDIVIDUAL TARGETED BY RACIST PROPAGHANDI. SO WHAT JA MORANT THINKS GUNS ARE COOL? SELF-DEFENSE IS COOL NO DOUBT. AND MUCH COOLER THAN DIALING 911 FOR RACIST OR MENTACIDAL COPS TO COME ‘HELP YOU” OUT LIKE PUSSYCLOT SHANNON ADVOCATES. NICE JACKET SNIGGER.

On March 4, it was revealed that the NBA had launched an investigation into an Instagram Live video of Morant displaying a gun at a Colorado nightclub earlier that morning, just hours after a loss to the top-seeded Denver Nuggets.[93][94] Later that day, the Grizzlies announced that Morant would be away from the team for at least two games.[95] 

On March 15, Morant met with NBA commissioner Adam Silver in New York after exiting from his counseling program. Multiple other top NBA executives also attended the meeting.[99] The same day, the NBA announced that they had suspended Morant for eight games without pay for the nightclub incident. The suspension covered the six games that Morant had already missed as a result of his leave of absence from the Grizzlies, meaning he would be eligible to return to playing as soon as March 20.[102]

On May 14, two months after the first suspension, he was suspended from all team activities by the Grizzlies for flashing a gun during an Instagram Live session on his friend Davonte Pack's account.[103][104] Following the incident, NBA Commissioner Adam Silver said he was "shocked" and that the league and the team would assess the extent of further disciplinary actions.[103]

WHATS REALLY WRONG? BLACK PEOPLE CAN’T HAVE GUNS TO DEFEND THEMSELVES? There are no allegations that Morant bought his firearm unlawfully or that he committed any crimes with it. All indications are that he is a rich, law abiding resident of Memphis, TN. It is also not clear how the NBA could prove the guns in the videos were actually real firearms. At any rate, the auto-coon NBA negroes and other showcase Blacks parroting Massa’s dogma about gun control to Shadowbox Ja seem to be ‘bignorant’ of the following: Black people also have the right to bear and carry firearms on their person in public to defend themselves in case of public confrontation. A 2022 Supreme Court ruling made it plain; the 2nd Amendment protects an individual’s right to keep and bear arms for self-defense in public. The Supreme Court clearly stated;

Nothing in the Second Amendment’s text draws a home/public distinction with respect to the right to keep and bear arms. As we explained in Heller, the “textual elements” of the Second Amendment’s operative clause— “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be in- fringed”—“guarantee the individual right to possess and carry weapons in case of confrontation. Heller further confirmed that the right to “bear arms” refers to the right to “wear, bear, or carry . . . upon the person or in the clothing or in a pocket, for the purpose . . . of being armed and ready for offensive or defensive action in a case of conflict with another person.”

This definition of “bear” naturally encompasses public carry. Most gun owners do not wear a holstered pistol at their hip in their bedroom or while sitting at the dinner table. Although individuals often “keep” firearms in their home, at the ready for self-defense, most do not “bear” (i.e., carry) them in the home beyond moments of actual confrontation. To confine the right to “bear” arms to the home would nullify half of the Second Amendment’s operative protections.

Moreover, confining the right to “bear” arms to the home would make little sense given that self-defense is “the central component of the [Second Amendment] right itself.” Heller, 554 U. S., at 599; see also McDonald, 561 U. S., at 767. After all, the Second Amendment guarantees an “individual right to possess and carry weapons in case of confrontation,” Heller, 554 U. S., at 592, and confrontation can surely take place outside the home.

Although we remarked in Heller that the need for armed self-defense is perhaps “most acute” in the home, id., at 628, we did not suggest that the need was insignificant else- where. Many Americans hazard greater danger outside the home than in it. See Moore v. Madigan, 702 F. 3d 933, 937 (CA7 2012) (“[A] Chicagoan is a good deal more likely to be attacked on a sidewalk in a rough neighborhood than in his apartment on the 35th floor of the Park Tower”). The text of the Second Amendment reflects that reality.

The Second Amendment’s plain text thus presumptively guarantees [individuals] a right to “bear” arms in public for self-defense.

Additionally, Tennessee became a permitless carry state in 2021, allowing for open and concealed carrying of handguns without a permit. 

Nevertheless liberal puppeticians and freedumb loving PropaGandhi work tirelessly to destroy said inalienable right.

Possessing a gun or defending yourself is not evil. So-called “gun rights” are especially important in a violent, racist society in which police routinely fail to protect Black people from criminals and have no legal obligation to do so anyway. [MORE]

When racist liberal authorities use Gun control measures that prevent Black or poor people from defending themselves in crime ridden areas they necessarily becomes accomplices to crime. Law abiding people comply with gun laws but criminals, who use guns to murder, assault, rob, deal drugs and rob and steal, don’t obey laws. As explained by Michael Huemer, “when the state deprives individuals of weapons, it can predict that some individuals will suffer murder, rape, or other serious crimes that would have been prevented if the victims had the means to defend themselves.” He further states, ‘the failure of police to protect people is one thing; actively intervening to stop them from protecting themselves is much worse. [MORE]

Only a NGHR would believe police primarily exist to protect and serve them. In fact, Black people are 3 times more likely than whites to be murdered by cops. Said factors exist in a legal context in which law enforcement is uncontrollable by citizens, generally unaccountable to them, can’t be hired or fired by citizens and has irresponsible, limitless power over people to take life on the street as they see fit while providing a compulsory “service” that citizens have no “right” to decline.

The inalienable or pre-existing right to bear and carry arms protects against the loss of all other freedoms. It may difficult for sleeping toms clinging to their cherished white liberal dogma to understand but the “2nd 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.” [MORE] The 2nd Amendment protects against overreaching government. Is that so hard to conceive when police murder Black men with impunity on a regular basis? As explained by Judge Alex Kozinski, “Disarmament was the tool of choice for subjugating both slaves and free blacks in the South.” 

Without the right to carry arms for self defense and defense against government tyranny all your other so-called “rights” can be turned on and off like a light by authorities. As explained by legal scholar Skylar Petit,

“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.” [MORE]

Indeed, Historical Analysis Shows Disarmed Formerly Free People Have No Defense Against Slavery or Govt Violence.

All of the ten major tyrannical regimes of the twentieth century and beyond confiscated the weapons of the populations they planned to murder or terrorize en masse. How could governments kill or enslave so many people?  The governments had all the power - and the people - the victims - were unable to resist. The victims were unarmed.

Naomi Wolf recently observed that in formerly free countries, such as Australia, citizens were routinely arrested for leaving their homes during COVID quarantines during a so-called “emergency” deemed as such by a unilateral authority without public input or vote. Wolf stated, ‘You can hate guns. But it is becoming obvious even to us pacifists, vegans, and tree huggers, that formerly free people who are unarmed are defenseless against the criminal tyrannies exerting massive violence and control upon them.‘ [MORE]

The Same Electromagnetic Devices Causing Magnets to Stick to Meat are Inside the ‘mRNA COVID Shots.’ They are not Vaccines but Bioweapons Created to Kill, Cause Illness and Permanently Change Humans

/

Pfizer's mRNA nanoparticles are electromagnetic devices per their DoD contract and the FDA. No one agreed to be injected with devices that would kill surrounding cells and tissue when activated by EMF.

mRNA ‘vaccine technology’ is not only being put into our food supply, but also being produced by plants.

Please keep in mind that ‘spike proteins’ and ‘mRNA’ are electromagnetic nanotechnologies that host electromagnetic fields. When mRNA nanoparticles (or spike proteins) are used to contaminate meat, chicken, or pork, the nanoparticles will congregate together thereby creating a strong electromagnetic field that can attract metals. 

Biotech analyst Karen Kingston explained, You can test your meat for electromagnetic fields using a quarter, nickel, or magnet. I’ve also used a house key, and that worked as well.

Transcript of Karen Kington Interview with Brannon Howse - May 17, 2022 

Brannon Howse: Joining me now is Karen Kingston, former Pfizer employee. It's been a few weeks since we've had her with us. Karen, welcome back to Lindell TV. Thank you for joining us.

Karen Kingston : Thanks for having me, Brannon. It's good to be back.

Brannon Howse: Well, Karen, as always, you've sent over a wonderful PowerPoint presentation. So, what are we going to talk about tonight, Karen,

Karen Kingston: Talking about evidence… there's more than enough evidence that shows that these inoculations are bioweapons. Various databases has over a million serious adverse events over 25,000 deaths, worsened disease, Unintended Consequences of the COVID-19 Vaccines by Dr. Seneffe at MIT was published last year. And she goes through 25 ways that these vaccines can disable, disfigure, or kill people. And they've all come true.

In May of last year, I sent an email out to mainstream media, influencers, congressmen and congresswoman saying, look, here are the studies from the Wuhan Institute of Virology weaponizing the SARS-Cov-2 virus with HIV glycoprotein 120. Here are the patents that state thay they include advanced medical technologies that can track the biomarkers and can exchange data. And then I also included some of the serious adverse events that were reported with the FDA data and what happened, Brannon? Everyone started asking whether or not it came from a lab or nature!! (No one inquired about the evidence I sent on the mRNA bioweapons). [MORE]

COVID-19 mRNA vaccines are not vaccines at all, but quite literally bioengineering nanotechnologies that are categorized as electromagnetic devices by the FDA and US Department of Defense (DoD). [MORE] and [MORE]

When the new ‘mRNA vaccines’ first became available in December of 2020, the American people were told that the ‘mRNA vaccines’ contained lipids that served as a protective bubble around the SARS-CoV-2 mRNA that would make our bodies produce the spike protein. After being injected, our bodies would produce the spike protein and our immune system would produce antibodies so that we would NOT be able to get infected and NOT be able to infect other people with SARS-CoV-2. 

In 2020/2021, everyone thought the ‘mRNA vaccine’ pitch sounded reasonable, safe and pretty much in alignment with other biological vaccines from the past.

The only problem is that everything we were told about what the mRNA ‘vaccines’ ARE is a misnomer and a lie, down to the very term mRNA vaccine. The COVID-19 injections are not mRNA vaccines. The COVID-19 mRNA shots are nanotechnology injections.

For example, the lipids and phospholipids in the mRNA injections are not lipids. Lipids are are naturally occurring molecules that make up fatty compounds such as fats and cholesterol. Lipids are part of our cells’ membranes to help control what goes in and out of cells. The ‘lipids’ in the mRNA injections are electronically charged synthetic molecules (not natural) and can host electromagnetic fields. They are electronic devices. [MORE] and [MORE]

‘I was Just Following Master’s Science to Induce Public Consent and Get People Killed/Harmed:’ A Retrospective of Probots and Proxymorons Parroting Lies About the Unvaccinated and COVID Shot Safety

/

According to FUNKTIONARY:

Probot – a propagandizing programmed robot. A representative from an organization, agency or institution, especially the Internal Revenue Service, Pentagon, State Department, or Blight House, whose assignment is to make prepared statements and answer “cooked” (prepared) questions at news conferences, briefings and the like. A probot is a proxymoron who conveys programmed disinformation in computerized language and bureaucratese jargon. A probot is one who disseminates lies, distortions and convenient mass truths composed by a superior overruling elite. (See: Proxymoron)

proxymoron – one moron who speaks or acts on behalf of another pluperfect moron or a whole gang of morons. (See: Politician, Bureaucracium, Congressman, Moron-Majority, Delegate, Prozac, Oxymoron & TV)

Women of Color for Equal Justice Suit Against Mandates says mRNA Shots Don't Prevent or Stop COVID. So They are Treatments Not Vaccines and People Have a Right to Refuse Treatment and Experimental Vax

/

From [HERE] First lawsuit in the U.S. that challenges the constitutional authority of federal, state, and private employers to mandate any vaccine as a condition of employment.

  • 30 years ago, the Occupation Safety & Health Act (OSH Act) abrogated federal, state, and private sector authority to mandate any vaccine to control airborne communicable diseases even during a pandemic.

  • According to the Application submitted by WOC4EJ, all vaccines violate the OSH Act minimum environmental method standards because they are incapable of shielding employees from exposure to any airborne viral hazards in the atmosphere nor can they remove viral sprays or vapors from the atmosphere in any public place as required under 29 CFR 1910.132(a) and OSH Act Sect. 5 General Duty Clause because vaccines are manufactured for medicinal internal personal use only.

  • The OSH Act protects the fundamental right of all citizens to refuse vaccines and bans employer wrongful separation of employees for exercising their right.

  • The right to refuse and choose medical treatments is a fundamental right of every citizen based on a 100-year Supreme Court precedent that includes the right to choose Plant-Based Lifestyle Medicine

As thousands of Americans remain locked out of their careers despite the lift of the federal vaccine mandate due to the continued enforcement of state and private sector Covid-19 vaccine mandates, on May 18, 2023, the 127th year anniversary of the landmark case Plessy v. Ferguson – wherein the US Supreme Court declared on May 18, 1896 that separate and unequal facilities for African-Americans was constitutional, the U.S. Supreme Court will vote in private conference on whether to rule on the merits of an Emergency Application that asks the Court to forever ban vaccine mandates by any public or private employer, which have caused cause millions of employees to be separated from their jobs based on their unvaccinated status.

The application submitted by the Women of Color For Equal Justice (WOC4EJ), on behalf of New York City employees, asks the Court to declare that all vaccine mandates are illegal and have been unauthorized since 1970 because they violate the Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSH Act) minimum safety standards as well as the Free Exercise and substantive Due Process clauses of the Constitution.

Excess Deaths are Exploding, Experts Pretend to be Stumped [genthanasia - a Slow Motion Extermination of Undesired Populations by Elites]

/

STORY AT-A-GLANCE

  • According to a May 11, 2023, report by the British Express, Britons are dying by the tens of thousands, “but no one knows why”

  • Between May and December 2022, there were 32,441 excess deaths in England and Wales, according to data released by the Office for National Statistics (ONS), and that doesn’t include COVID-related deaths

  • In 2022, the No. 1 cause of excess deaths in the U.K. was signs and symptoms of “ill-defined conditions.” In England, this nebulous cause of death was 36.9% above the five-year average, and in Wales, it was 30.4% above average

  • The U.K. was the first European country to approve the Pfizer COVID jab and began its mass injection campaign December 8, 2020. It currently has the highest COVID-19 jab rate in all of Europe

  • The misuse of mechanical ventilation created the appearance that COVID was exceptionally deadly, which in turn helped promote acceptance of the experimental COVID shots that are now a leading cause of frequent sickness, chronic disability and excess deaths

From [HERE] According to a May 11, 2023, report by the British Express, 1 Britons are dying by the tens of thousands, “but no one knows why.” Between May and December 2022 alone, there were 32,441 excess deaths in England and Wales, according to data 2 released by the Office for National Statistics (ONS), and that doesn’t include COVID-related deaths. As reported by the Express: 3

“Excess deaths are defined as the number of people who died above the five-year average — worked out excluding 2020 due to how COVID spiked death figures that year ... The shock revelation has raised alarm bells amid health professionals ...

Professor David Coleman, Emeritus Professor of Demography at Oxford University, told the Mirror that no one knew for certain what had caused so many deaths throughout last year.

He pointed out that, post COVID, the UK’s population had been changed through the deaths of a significant proportion of the elderly due to the virus. He explained: ‘Once those poor people have been packed off, the remaining population should be healthier, there should be a period afterwards where deaths are lower than usual but that hasn’t happened.’”

No. 1 Cause of Excess Deaths: ‘Ill-Defined Conditions’

According to the Express, two of the primary causes of excess deaths were ischemic heart diseases and dementia. This, the article suggests, might be an indication that obesity and an increasingly older population are to blame for the excess mortality.

However, if the population was altered due to a significant portion of the elderly dying from COVID in 2020, leaving a younger and supposedly healthier population, as stated by professor Coleman, those puzzle pieces don’t exactly fit together.

What’s more, the Express failed to specify that dementia and Alzheimer’s were only the leading causes of death during the month of December 2022. For 2022, the No. 1 cause of excess deaths was signs and symptoms of “ill-defined conditions.”4

In England, this nebulous cause of death was 36.9% above the five-year average, and in Wales, it was 30.4% above average. 5

Now, what does that remind you of? “Sudden adult death syndrome” perhaps — a historically rare cause of death that suddenly skyrocketed after the COVID jabs came on the scene.

As illustrated in the video above, during 2021 and into 2022, mainstream media kept drilling the false and incredibly offensive narrative that the unvaccinated were the enemy, that every COVID death meant they had blood on their hands and ought to be punished accordingly.

And now, as countries where most people have been jabbed experience skyrocketing excess death rates unrelated to COVID, they feign mind-numbing ignorance.

An experimental gene transfer injection was introduced as a vaccine and death rates continue to climb even as COVID is vanishing. What a mystery! Everyone is stumped. The scientific consensus is at a standstill. No one knows why people are dying.

Possibly, not enough people got the jab. That’s what the BBC insinuated in early 2023. 6

No one wants to admit that medical experimentation on the public was a terrible idea. No one wants to consider the possibility that too many took the toxic jab, and that’s why excess mortality is so far above norm.

As cardiologist Dr. Peter McCullough has repeatedly stated, we had a clear safety signal all the way back in February 2021, and it’s only gotten more pronounced over time. Despite that, not a single safety review has been conducted, and our health authorities refuse to address the astronomical death toll.

UK Has Highest COVID Jab Rate in Europe

In the U.K., 2020 was the deadliest year on record since 1918. More than 695,000 deaths were logged that year. The culprit at that time was COVID, or suspected COVID. But what happened next?

The U.K. was the first European country to approve the Pfizer COVID jab and began its mass injection campaign December 8, 2020. It currently has the highest COVID-19 jab rate in all of Europe, in large part due to having “the most positive attitudes to vaccine safety in Europe,” according to Statista.

7 If the COVID shots were safe and protective, you’d expect excess mortality to decline from there on, but that didn’t happen. The third week of January 2021 saw a huge spike above norm, and the rate has dipped and peaked ever since.

8 In 2022, excess deaths exceeded 650,000, which was 9% higher than 2019. So, why are so many people dying? And why are so many dying from inexplicable causes or “ill-defined” conditions?

In January 2023, BBC news blamed the excess death rate in 2022 on “pandemic effects on health and NHS pressures.”

9 Ambulance response times were more than doubled, hospital waits were long, and “people are more likely to have heart problems and strokes in the weeks and months after catching COVID,” the BBC said.

The BBC also claimed there was “no evidence of vaccine effect,” and that cases of myocarditis and pericarditis were “too rare — and mostly not fatal — to account for the excess in deaths.”

But myocarditis and pericarditis are FAR from the only side effects caused by these shots, so the fact that these conditions aren’t among the top causes certainly doesn’t mean that the shots are safe and aren’t causing people to die prematurely.

Aside from foolhardy medical experimentation, the excess death rates may also have something to do with the fact that hospitals around the world have been killing “suspected” COVID patients with lethal treatment protocols, as detailed in “How COVID Patients Died for Profit.”

Massively Anomalous Data Put COVID Shots in the Crosshairs

In the March 24, 2023, “Ask Dr. Drew” interview above, Drew interviewed Ed Dowd, author of “Cause Unknown.” As noted by Dowd, data from the insurance industry, funeral home industry and various government databases strongly indicate that the COVID shots are killing people, primarily working age adults, many of whom had to get the shot to keep their jobs.

While some countries are now pulling back from the shots, in the U.S., the COVID injections have been added to the childhood and adult vaccination schedules, and no one has proposed removing them.

According to Dowd, Denmark, for example, stopped recommending COVID boosters for anyone younger than 50, as their excess deaths in 2021 and 2022 shot up to around 20% above norm. Clearly, decision-makers there connected the dots and decided it was better to be safe than sorry.

Dowd goes on to review absence rates and lost worktime data 10 for the U.S. Among full-time employees aged 25 to 54, there was a stark deviation in 2020, 2021 and 2022 from the 2002 through 2019 trend. In 2020, it was a three-standard deviation, which is reasonable considering governments were shutting down businesses. But then, in 2021, it rose to five standard deviations and in 2022, it skyrocketed to 11 standard deviations, which makes no sense whatsoever.

Compared to 2019, the absence rate for working age adults was only 3.6% higher in 2020, when lockdowns were in effect and many businesses were closed. In 2021, the absence rate was 10.7% higher than 2019, and in 2022, it was 28.6% higher. In short, in 2022, nearly one-third more employees missed days of work compared to 2019, which amounts to an enormous loss of productivity, and this at a time when there were no lockdowns in the U.S.

Looking at the number of hours lost per absence, the 2022 numbers were 13 standard deviations higher than 2019, which Dowd says is “unheard of.” Compared to the 2019 baseline, lost worktime rates were 28.6% higher in 2020 and 2021, and then suddenly jumped to 50% in 2022. This too equates to a major loss of productivity and therefore economic losses.

So, what is going on? In short, people are missing work due to vaccine-related sickness. As noted by Dowd, we have studies showing the shots impair your immune function, and these data show that, yes, people are getting sick and calling out from work at an unprecedented frequency and they’re out sick 50% longer than normal.

mRNA COVID Jabs Had No Effect on Mortality

In related news, we now also have evidence 11 showing the mRNA COVID jabs have no mortality benefit. As reported by Epoch Health:12

“The Pfizer and Moderna COVID-19 vaccines did not impact overall mortality, a reanalysis of clinical trial data found.

The two vaccines, both based on messenger RNA (mRNA) technology, protected against deaths from COVID-19 but that effect was offset by vaccinated trial participants being more likely to die from cardiovascular problems, Christine Stabell Benn, a health professor at the University of Southern Denmark, and other researchers reported in April in the Cell journal.

13

The research analyzed data from randomized clinical trials (RCTs) reported by the companies that manufacture the vaccines. ‘In the RCTs with the longest possible blinded follow-up, mRNA vaccines had no effect on overall mortality despite protecting against some COVID-19 deaths.”

Meanwhile, the Johnson & Johnson shot, which uses an adenovirus-vector, was associated with lower non-COVID-19 mortality and overall mortality, but had NO effect on COVID-19 mortality. So, in essence, all the COVID shots are useless in one way or another. The mRNA versions cause greater overall mortality, and the adenovirus-vector ones don’t protect against COVID-related death. Take your pick.

Interestingly, out of all the brands, AstraZeneca’s adenovirus-vector shot performed the best, and that’s the one that was maligned the most by health regulators and media across the world, as it was associated with lethal blood clots early on.

More Evidence COVID Jab Does More Harm Than Good

Another reanalysis of randomized COVID jab trials concluded that the shots are far more likely to land you in the hospital than COVID-19 itself. This study, 14 which focused on serious adverse events highlighted in a World Health Organization-endorsed priority list 15 of potential adverse events relevant to the COVID-19 shots, found Pfizer’s shot was associated with an increased risk of serious adverse events at a rate of 10.1 events per 10,000.

The rate for Moderna’s jab was 15.1 events per 10,000. The researchers also stressed that this level of risk for a post-injection event was significantly greater than the risk reduction for COVID-related hospitalization, which was only 2.3 per 10,000 participants in the Pfizer trial and 6.4 per 10,000 in the Moderna trial.

In short, for every 800 jab recipients, one person will suffer a serious injury. Meanwhile, some 5,000 must get the Pfizer jab to prevent a single COVID hospitalization. This is what risk-benefit analysis is all about — comparing and weighing the benefit against the risk — and when it comes to the mRNA COVID shots, they clearly do more harm than good.

Considering the high rate of injury, is it hard to believe that people are calling out sick from work more often or that excess mortality is skyrocketing? There’s not a single piece of evidence so far that exonerates the COVID shots, yet the media want you to believe it’s an inexplicable mystery.

The Misuse of Mechanical Ventilation Created the False Appearance that COVID was Exceptionally Deadly, which in turn Promoted Acceptance of COVID Shots that Cause Sickness/Disability and Excess deaths

/

AI Links COVID Deaths to Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia

From [HERE] Another piece of news that’s been making the rounds is that artificial intelligence (AI) has linked COVID mortality to unresolved ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP), basically, a secondary bacterial infection caused by intubation that didn’t respond to treatment. As described in the abstract, published April 27, 2023, in the Journal of Clinical Investigation: 16 17

“We performed a single-center prospective cohort study of 585 mechanically ventilated patients with severe pneumonia and respiratory failure, 190 of whom had COVID-19, who underwent at least one bronchoalveolar lavage [BAL].

Given the relatively long ICU length of stay among patients with COVID-19, we developed a machine learning approach called CarpeDiem, which groups similar ICU patient-days into clinical states based on electronic health record data.

CarpeDiem revealed that the long ICU length of stay among patients with COVID-19 is attributable to long stays in clinical states characterized primarily by respiratory failure. While VAP was not associated with mortality overall, mortality was higher in patients with one episode of unsuccessfully treated VAP compared with successfully treated VAP (76.4% versus 17.6%, P < 0.001).

In all patients, including those with COVID-19, CarpeDiem demonstrated that unresolving VAP was associated with transitions to clinical states associated with higher mortality.

Conclusions: Unsuccessful treatment of VAP is associated with greater mortality. The relatively long length of stay among patients with COVID-19 is primarily due to prolonged respiratory failure, placing them at higher risk of VAP.”

Use of Ventilation Is Likely the Core Problem

While many have argued that this study shows secondary infections are to blame for many a COVID death, Modern Discontent 18 on Substack calls for prudence when interpreting these results, stating that upon closer scrutiny, the study doesn’t offer much in terms of substantial evidence.

Moreover, whenever you’re using AI, what comes out depends on what was put in, and in this case, CarpeDiem did not supply important data variables, and this may have skewed the results. Since “key factors have been excluded from the analysis there’s going to be several flaws in interpreting the correlative power of some of CarpeDiem's results,” Modern Discontent warns, adding:

“Overall, I’ll argue that the study has serious issues in outlining their data. There’s a ton missing here, including which bacteria were cultured from BAL samples.

The timing of BAL collection is up in the air, and the study also doesn’t make it clear early on how many patients actually experienced an episode of VAP, whether in the COVID group or the other groups (you have to dig into the actual body to find a reference to VAP episodes).

The lack of organization makes the study rather difficult to read, and I won’t say that I have it figured out yet ... It’s quite clear that many of these individuals are already in various states of severe respiratory distress and failure as noted by the clinical states and relative mortality rates, making these people more at risk of death irrespective of from SARS-COV2 or a bacterial infection ...

It’s not necessarily the secondary infection that is cause for concern, but the fact that many patients require ventilation.

Upon ventilation, the secondary concern may be the secondary bacterial infection, although the researchers don’t provide any insights into why some patients were not able to resolve their VAP episode. This is, again, an issue with the lack of data provided by the researchers themselves.”

COVID Jab Accepted Due to Ventilator-Driven Death Toll

Now, aside from the massively coercive PR campaign, one of the reasons that many accepted the COVID shot without much deliberation was the fact that hospitalized COVID patients were dying in droves. They didn’t want to end up on a vent and die, and all the pundits said the shots would prevent you from getting seriously ill and dying.

The problem, of course, is that mechanical ventilation should not have been a standard treatment for COVID, and some doctors realized this within a few weeks. High-flow cannulas and proning were far more effective. 19

The reason mechanical ventilation was promoted as an early intervention was not because it was helpful for the patient, but because it was thought to protect the staff from the virus. It was a strategy to reduce contagion. 20

 This was detailed in provider guidance 21 from the World Health Organization in March 2020.

The guidance recommended 22 escalating treatment to mechanical ventilation as rapidly as possible to isolate the virus inside the mechanical vent machine. In other words, they put patients on a treatment they knew would likely kill them to “save” staff and other, presumably non-COVID, patients.

Considering this context, blaming the death of vented patients on secondary infections may be little more than an attempt to shift blame away from hospitals that adhered to these ineffective and dangerous protocols.

I disagree with Modern Discontent when he or she says that the primary concern is “the fact that many patients require ventilation.” There’s plenty of evidence that says they don’t, and without ventilation, the risk of ventilator-associated secondary bacterial infection drops to zero, does it not? Secondary bacterial infections may still occur, but they won’t be VAP.

So, in conclusion, the misuse of mechanical vents created the appearance that COVID was exceptionally deadly, which in turn helped promote acceptance of the experimental COVID shots, which are now a leading cause of frequent sickness, chronic disability and excess deaths.

Doctors with Ethics, Post-Plandemic? A Leading Medical Journal says ‘Physician Involvement in Executions Violates Medical Ethics’

/

From [HERE] A May 20, 2023 editorial in a leading medical academic journal concludes that physician participation in executions “goes against the ethical foundation of the physician's role” and argues that doctors and medical associations should oppose capital punishment. 

The editorial in The Lancet describes how many physicians currently participate in executions: Doctors “clinically assess mental competence for execution; physically examine and monitor vital signs before, during, and after execution; and certify death. In extreme cases, physicians take the role of executioner and are implicated in illegal organ procurement from executed prisoners.” The authors note that some physicians may participate out of a desire to reduce suffering and others may be coerced into participating. But The Lancet agrees with the views of the World Medical Association, American Medical Association, Physicians for Human Rights, and other human rights groups that explicitly oppose medical professionals’ participation in capital punishment because it violates medical ethics. The Lancet concludes that, “Physician involvement [in executions] enables this continuing abuse of human rights and undermines the four pillars of medical ethics—beneficence, non-maleficence, autonomy, and justice.”

The editorial also broadly criticizes the biased application of the death penalty around the world. Citing Amnesty International’s report on the global use of the death penalty in 2022, the editorial explains, “executions frequently correlate with areas where dictatorial regimes prevail, often silencing political protest and enforcing views on issues such as drug use and LGBTQ+ identities. …The death penalty is the most brutal form of structural, state-sanctioned discrimination, racism, and homophobia.”

Minnesota Abolishes Juvenile Life-Without-Parole Sentences

/

From [HERE] Minnesota lawmakers this week abolished life imprisonment without parole for children. The reform is part of a public safety bill designed to transform the state’s approach to children accused of criminal offenses.

The bill not only retroactively eliminates juvenile life-without-parole sentences but also provides that children sentenced in adult court will be eligible for supervised release after at least 15 years in prison.

A newly created Supervised Release Board will be required to consider an expert assessment of the individual’s cognitive, emotional, and social maturity as well as relevant science on children’s neurological development.

Approximately 40 people will be eligible for review, University of Minnesota law professor Perry Moriearty toldthe Star Tribune.

The new law also creates a statewide Office of Restorative Practices to promote alternative, community-based approaches to hold children accountable, respond to victims’ needs, and address the issues underlying children’s behavior.

State grants will be provided to counties to develop local restorative justice initiatives, such as victim-offender dialogues and family group conferences, with input from parents, youths, school administrators, county prosecutors, and local law enforcement.

“Too often, the criminal legal system just focuses on punishment,” Justin Terrell, executive director of the Minnesota Justice Research Center, told the Star Tribune. “But expanding restorative outcomes and making it a priority for the system means that you’re addressing the harm that’s been caused and that people can actually move on from that harm — and that helps create safe communities.”

Gov. Tim Walz tweeted Tuesday that he plans to sign the legislation, which will make Minnesota the 28th state to abolish life-without-parole sentences for children.

AG Probes Racism Allegations in liberal, white Boston: The Main Criteria for the Police Gang Database is Skin Color (90% Black and Latino). Cops Targeting Law Abiding People and Kids as "Gang Members"

/

From [HERE] The Massachusetts attorney general's office has launched an investigation into allegations of racial bias at the Boston Police Department’s youth gang unit and its associated database, according to a statement from the office released late Monday.

The probe by state Attorney General Andrea Campbell’s civil rights division will examine an alleged “pattern or practice of racially biased policing” within the Youth Violence Strike Force, the department’s gang unit, state officials said. A Boston police spokesperson says the department will cooperate with the review.

State officials say the review will look into the task force's work since 2018 with a goal of reforming the gang unit, following calls from civil rights advocates who want the database to be abolished, citing alleged racism and a lack of transparency. It comes amidst a national review of similar units following the death of Tyre Nichols in Memphis, who was killed during a traffic stop by five members of that city's now disbanded gang unit.

"The Boston Police gang database is flawed and shouldn't be relied on to make consequential decisions about people’s lives,” said Carol Rose, the executive director of the ACLU of Massachusetts, one of several civil rights groups who sued the police department last year to make more information about the database public. “The database overwhelmingly targets Black and Hispanic young people, who have been labeled as gang members for little more than wearing popular brands or even becoming a victim of gang violence … the attorney general is right to investigate it."

A “gang” is qualified as three or more people who individually or together engage in criminal activity, frequent a specific location and share a common name or identifier, like a color or symbol, according to the Boston Police Department’s rules and procedures. Gang members are “active” if they have met the criteria to be associated with a gang, had contact with another gang member or participated in gang activity within the last five years.

A summary provided by the department in response to the ACLU’s 2019 lawsuit showed that 90% of the 4,700 individuals in the gang database at that time were Black or Latino.

“Youth have been surveilled in Dorchester and Roxbury for wearing a certain kind of hat or hanging out in a certain corner of the neighborhood,” said Massachusetts Bail Fund Director Janhavi Madabushi. “There's just such a low threshold for what gets you onto a list, and whatever gets you on that list is something that justifies you being policed or surveilled for however long the unit deems necessary.”

An association with the gang database can prevent pre-trial detainees from getting access to bail for months or even years, Madabushi said.

“We're seeing an increase in dangerousness hearings, where a prosecutor and judge can determine through a random set of criteria that a person is too dangerous to be let out on cash bail,” she said. Detainees take plea deals to limit jail time in what Madabushi described as “a dangerous pattern in preventive detention … detaining of people who are supposedly innocent until proven guilty, but not this time.”

The investigation is ongoing and has not yet made any findings or conclusions. If issues are discovered, the goal is to work with the police department in reforming the unit and database, a spokesperson for Campbell said.

Madabushi says it remains unclear whether the investigation will result in “the type of victory that our community members need and want to see,” and will require the attorney general’s office to seek out directly impacted people, many of whom might be hesitant to come forward.

“I feel a little bit apprehensive to sort of rejoice before understanding how the [attorney general’s office] is going to conduct this investigation, what their considerations are,” she said. “But I hope that this surfaces what community members have been saying for a really long time.”