1

Billionaires Became ONE TRILLION DOLLARS Richer in 2020

By Really Graceful | Really Graceful

US Billionaires became 1 trillion dollars richer since the beginning of 2020. How did they do it? Let’s discuss.

Robert O’Leary, JD BARA, has had an abiding interest in alternative health products & modalities since the early 1970’s & he has seen how they have made people go from lacking health to vibrant health. He became an attorney, singer-songwriter, martial artist & father along the way and brings that experience to his practice as a BioAcoustic Soundhealth Practitioner, under the tutelage of the award-winning founder of BioAcoustic Biology, Sharry Edwards, whose Institute of BioAcoustic Biology has now been serving clients for 30 years with a non-invasive & safe integrative modality that supports the body’s ability to self-heal using the power of the human voice. Robert brings this modality to serve clients in Greater Springfield, Massachusetts and New England (USA) & “virtually” the world. He can also be reached at romayasoundhealthandbeauty@gmail.




UN Announces Biometric Digital ID Wallet

digital ID wallet
Image by PublicDomainPictures from Pixabay

By Spiro Skouras | Activist Post

Recently, the United Nations had some big announcements that went largely unnoticed, including the rollout of a biometric digital wallet and an announcement that one of its specialized agencies The International Civil Aviation Organization is one step closer to an internationally recognized digital travel credential.

As reported by Biometric Update, this particular UN biometric digital wallet is intended for UN employees and it can be used for data related to human resources, medical status, travel, payroll, and pensions.

I hope you see where this is going, every aspect of our lives will be centralized digitally using biometrics and in many cases the blockchain, AI, and 5G.

I can’t help but to raise the question, what kind of social controls could this possibly provide the technocrats if people decide not to obey certain restrictions or requirements?

Example: If you didn’t get your latest shot, individuals may face travel restrictions. Or, you may not be able go to work, or your payments may be frozen until you comply.

They may not have to mandate anything if they can ‘encourage’ you to obey.

Digital travel credential one step closer with ICAO implementation model approval
https://www.biometricupdate.com/202011/digital-travel-credential-one-step-closer-with-icao-implementation-model-approval

Replacing a conventional passport with digital travel credentials
https://unitingaviation.com/news/security-facilitation/replacing-a-conventional-passport-with-digital-travel-credentials/

Acuant Joins Canada’s Digital Identity Organization to Impact a More Secure Future
https://www.globenewswire.com/news-release/2020/11/17/2128087/0/en/Acuant-Joins-Canada-s-Digital-Identity-Organization-to-Impact-a-More-Secure-Future.html

Biometric smart cards and civic digital identity apps to redefine wallets
https://www.biometricupdate.com/202011/biometric-smart-cards-and-civic-digital-identity-apps-to-redefine-wallets

Anti-Vaxxers Could Be Banned from Work if They Refuse to Get the COVID-19 Vaccine
https://www.distractify.com/p/anti-vaxxers-banned-work-refuse-vaccine

Trust Stamp integrating biometric hash solution with Mastercard on children’s vaccine record system
https://www.biometricupdate.com/202007/trust-stamp-integrating-biometric-hash-solution-with-mastercard-on-childrens-vaccine-record-system

Fact Checking the Fact Checkers: Bill Gates, ID2020 & Vaccine Microchips
https://www.activistpost.com/2020/04/fact-checking-the-fact-checkers-bill-gates-id2020-vaccine-microchips.html

Henry Kissinger & Bill Gates Call For Mass Vaccination & Global Governance
https://www.activistpost.com/2020/04/henry-kissinger-bill-gates-call-for-mass-vaccination-global-governance.html

Follow Spiro on BitChute bitchute.com/channel/spiro/ Follow on Twitter https://twitter.com/o_rips




David Wilcock and Dannion Brinkley: Hidden History of Elections

Source: Divine Cosmos

David Wilcock and Dannion Brinkley reveal in the above video how past presidential and senatorial and elections, going back decades, were full of corruption by use of electronic voting software that changed the vote tallies of the various candidates.

Editor’s note: 2020 certainly has been a crazy and stressful year. Wow The final months of 2020 seem to be shaping up to be just as crazy and stressful as the prior months. We are collectively experiencing one of the strangest outcomes to a presidential election ever. President Trump maintains that there was corruption in the vote tabulation this year, and that many legal votes were left uncounted and many illegal votes were counted, giving his opponent the perceived and presumptive win in the election. Trump has been facing a great deal of backlash from the mainstream media and Democratic pundits. The public perception seems to be that most elections are done in a legal and appropriate manner, and that in general the will of the people has determined the winner in every election. David Wilcock and Dannion Brinkley reveal in the above video how that certain past senatorial and presidential elections, going back decades, were in fact been full of corruption, whereby the will of the people was denied by use of electronic voting software to change the vote tallies of the various candidates in election races. After watching this video, you may come away with the conclusion that it is possible that what President Trump is claiming may have happened could have happened. Please let us know your thoughts about this video in the comments section below.

Robert O’Leary, JD BARA, has had an abiding interest in alternative health products & modalities since the early 1970’s & he has seen how they have made people go from lacking health to vibrant health. He became an attorney, singer-songwriter, martial artist & father along the way and brings that experience to his practice as a BioAcoustic Soundhealth Practitioner, under the tutelage of the award-winning founder of BioAcoustic Biology, Sharry Edwards, whose Institute of BioAcoustic Biology has now been serving clients for 30 years with a non-invasive & safe integrative modality that supports the body’s ability to self-heal using the power of the human voice. Robert brings this modality to serve clients in Greater Springfield, Massachusetts and New England (USA) & “virtually” the world. He can also be reached at romayasoundhealthandbeauty@gmail.




CEO’s GRILLED over Whistleblower Evidence of De-platforming Collusion Between Big Tech

By Ben Swann | Truth in Media
In the above video, Sen. Josh Hawley of Missouri grills Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg over reports of the “Tasks” Platform reportedly used by FB, Twitter and Google to coordinate censorship of people, ideas and hashtags

Editor’s note: As you have probably noticed, the communications giants, known as Facebook, Google, and Twitter have appeared before the United States Congress many times. They have had to face questions about their actions or inactions concerning various questions about content, freedom, censorship, et al. On November 17, 2020, they were answering more questions, including whether they collude with one another to determine which users, platforms and content should be limited or banned. The following video, by Ben Swann of Truth in Media, is very enlightening on this subject. Please let us know what you think of it in our comments section below. Thank you

Robert O’Leary, JD BARA, has had an abiding interest in alternative health products & modalities since the early 1970’s & he has seen how they have made people go from lacking health to vibrant health. He became an attorney, singer-songwriter, martial artist & father along the way and brings that experience to his practice as a BioAcoustic Soundhealth Practitioner, under the tutelage of the award-winning founder of BioAcoustic Biology, Sharry Edwards, whose Institute of BioAcoustic Biology has now been serving clients for 30 years with a non-invasive & safe integrative modality that supports the body’s ability to self-heal using the power of the human voice. Robert brings this modality to serve clients in Greater Springfield, Massachusetts and New England (USA) & “virtually” the world. He can also be reached at romayasoundhealthandbeauty@gmail.




As Millions Face Eviction, Senate Proposes Nearly $700 Billion for Pentagon

US Pentagon Military
Image by David Mark from Pixabay

By John Vibes | The Mind Unleashed

As millions face eviction and line up at food banks throughout the country, waiting for another stimulus payment that will seemingly never come, the Senate Appropriations Committee is proposing a $696 billion Pentagon spending bill for the upcoming fiscal year.

According to The Hill, The Senate’s version of the fiscal 2021 Pentagon spending bill was released Tuesday along with 11 other annual appropriations bills.

Both Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi have said they want to pass an omnibus spending bill, and they will likely agree on the military budget, as Democrats overwhelmingly vote in favor of military spending when they have the opportunity, just as Republicans do.

In July, the House passed a $694.6 billion bill for Pentagon spending in July. The Senate version released this week includes $627.2 billion for the base defense budget and $68.7 billion for a war fund known as the Overseas Contingency Operations account, and also includes a 3% pay raise for troops.

However, the final Senate version of the bill left out a few causes that were championed by progressive Democrats, including the renaming of military bases that are named after Confederate leaders, and measures that were intended to block defense funds from being used on the border wall.

The Senate’s bill would also fund 96 F-35 fighter jets, which is an increase over the original bill and over the administration’s initial request. In addition to the fighter jets, the bill also gives the Pentagon $21.35 billion to build nine new battle force ships.

Meanwhile, millions of Americans are unemployed and many are now starting to get evicted. According to the most recent numbers there are 6.8 million, and this only accounts for the people officially collecting unemployment, this does not include the number of people who are not qualified for unemployment, or people who have been out of the work force for an extended length of time. The unemployment rate dropped slightly over the past two months, but is still at record highs.

According to estimates by the Princeton University Eviction Lab, 3.6 million people face eviction cases in a typical year. This year, up to 8 million people could be facing eviction, according to a tracking tool developed by the global advisory firm Stout Risius and Ross, which works with the nonprofit National Coalition for a Civil Right to Counsel.

It is also estimated that up to $32 billion in back rent will be due for tenants across the US once bans on evictions are lifted. Despite bans on evictions, many landlords in the US are still kicking people out of their homes, and in some cases, they have even challenged the eviction bans in court.

The people who are struggling financially in the US can’t count on much help from the government. Even the prospects of a new stimulus check are uncertain, and a payment will not be coming until next year at the very earliest, if it comes at all. Yet, the Pentagon is still able to claim nearly $700 billion in taxpayer money.

About The Author

John Vibes is an author, researcher, and investigative journalist who takes a special interest in the counter culture and the drug war.

 

 




The Esoteric Meaning Behind Neo’s Interrogation Scene in The Matrix

neo matrix system
Photo by Markus Spiske from Pexels

By Gavin Nascimento | A New Kind Of Human

More than 20 years old now, The Matrix is recognized by fans across the world as being one of the most brilliant films in history, most notably for its deeper meaning and esoteric philosophy.

matrix esoteric meaning

One scene that is particularly intriguing, considering the social climate of today, is Neo’s interrogation by the Agents of the Matrix.

Now, before we dig into the potential hidden meaning here, and how Neo found himself in this uncomfortable position to begin with, let’s first establish some key points in relation to the overall story line that will help us to appreciate the implications behind this scene a little bit more.

WHAT DOES THE CHARACTER NEO REPRESENT IN THE MATRIX?

Neo in ancient Greek (νέος) means new/young one. This is an important piece of the puzzle to help us understand what the directors of the film are trying to communicate to us. With that said, when we assess Neo’s character in the first film, we find that he is a solitary individual that keeps to himself and is struggling to find deeper meaning in this world by constantly searching the internet.

WHAT DOES THE CHARACTER MORPHEUS REPRESENT IN THE MATRIX?

Morpheus in Greek mythology is a messenger of the gods. He appears to humans through dreams with the intention of delivering divine Knowledge and Truth. In the Greek mythos, he can appear in almost any form in people’s dreams, which could be because anyone, regardless of race, gender, or outward appearance, can be a messenger of enlightenment and Truth.

THE FIRST MATRIX FILM IS ABOUT THE BEGINNING OF THE JOURNEY TO AWAKENING

With the understanding of the deeper meaning behind what Neo and Morpheus’ characters represent in the film, we can now appreciate the intro scene of Neo sleeping (whilst searching for Morpheus) through a different lens of perception and awareness.

You see, Neo sleeping whilst searching online for Morpheus represents the early stages of the Truth seekers journey — “asleep” but still searching for deeper meaning in life — and hoping to find that meaning by seeking out a “messenger” of higher Knowledge and Truth.

TRUTH IS TERRORISM IN THE EMPIRE OF LIES

Through his incessant efforts, Neo begins to get closer and closer to finding the elusive Morpheus. This, however, also attracts the unwanted attention of the Agents in the Matrix, which represent the enforcers of the shadow government of this system. Their job is to ensure that no one exposes what the Matrix really is, and how it turns unsuspecting every day human beings into useful resources that it can use and exploit.

what is the matrix morpheus quote

The Agents proceed to apprehend Neo and interrogate him, where they make it very clear that they’ve been spying on him and keeping meticulous records of his activities, both online and offline, for quite some time now. As we all know very well today, all around the world intelligence agencies are doing exactly that — tracking what we view online and keeping meticulous records on many of our movements.

esoteric meaning matrix interrogation

The agents, however, do not see Neo as being a major threat to the Matrix system, as he is still in the early stages of his awakening and does not know enough to be a major threat. Instead, they offer him a deal where they will be willing to “wipe the slate clean” on his illegal activities online, if Neo will simply help them track down the man they call Morpheus, who they claim is “a known terrorist” that is “considered by many authorities to be the most dangerous man alive”.

This represents that the single greatest threat to this manipulative system — which is overwhelmingly ruled by deception and exploitation — is any messenger of higher Knowledge and Truth that can potentially awaken those who are still “asleep” to what the proverbial Matrix really is. In fact, one could argue this sort of power struggle has been going on for thousands of years, and is possibly why Socrates was accused of “corrupting the youth” by the ruling class more than 2,000 years ago and subsequently sentenced to death; or why, Fred Hampton was assassinated by government authorities in 1969; or, in more recent history, why civilians that were peacefully protesting against Wall Street and the bankers for their part in destroying the world economy in 2008, were targeted by the FBI and even labelled as potential “domestic terrorists“.

Simply put, Truth is terrorism in the empire of lies.

IMAGINARY RIGHTS

Neo, still being somewhat naïve and unbegun in his journey, rejects the Agent’s offer and demands he get a phone call because “I know my rights!”

To this, Agent Smith retorts, “tell me Mr. Anderson, what good is a phone call if you’re unable to speak?”, which results in Neo’s mouth warping in the most eerie of ways.

neo interrogation meaning

This scene represents a lesson that all genuine Truth seekers eventually come to learn — this system is not concerned with human rights nor is it concerned with upholding authentic justice. Instead, it inculcates these beliefs and misperceptions into our minds from a very young age, because it serves to help legitimize its unnecessary existence in the eyes of the unsuspecting public and indoctrinate us as to why we think we need it. But in reality, our government guaranteed “rights” can be taken away from us in the blink of an eye.

In relation to current events, for example, many thousands of people worldwide have been arrested for violating curfew orders; In one Indian state, civilians were told they must take selfies every hour and send it to the authorities to prove that they are staying indoors; in South Africa, some have been fined for not wearing masks while driving their cars; In Boston in the United States, people have even been told that they will be fined if they walk “the wrong direction” down the street; Homeless people in France have reportedly been fined for not staying indoors; Some people have been arrested for attending funerals of loved ones because it violated lockdown orders; Others (including doctors and scientists) have had their right to freedom of speech censored online; In Australia, a pregnant woman was actually arrested in her home for facebook posts that encouraged protesting against the lockdown; According to the International Labor Organization, tens of millions are being pushed into unemployment; and travel all around the world has been severely restricted by these authorities who have taken it upon themselves to be the rulers of this planet by dictating what the rest of us can and cannot do. Whether you agree with these policies or not, these things cannot logically be called “rights” since they are so very easily violated and taken away from us.

gavin nascimento imagination quote

There are many other examples that demonstrate how our government given “rights” are more of a comforting illusion than an actual reality, such as the CIA’s secretive Black Site torture programs, which have been done in cooperation with other intelligence agencies and authorities throughout the world. In these programs, people have been kidnapped — without any legal criminal charge or trial — and then taken to undisclosed secret locations where many of them are tortured for many months on end, in ways that are considered to be in violation of international law and basic human rights. The CIA, of course, simply claims they are suspected terrorists. In 2014, however, a Senate Intelligence Committee Report found that at least 26 of the people that were kidnapped and tortured were actually “wrongfully detained”.

WAKE UP NEO — YOU ARE THE ONE

Fortunately, Neo manages to escape this unthinkable situation without any serious injury or harm. Soon after, he is contacted by Morpheus, where he is told that he was very lucky that the Agents underestimated his great potential and spared him, because if the Agents had known the great secret that Morpheus knows, then Neo would probably be dead.

Confused by the obvious strangeness of everything taking place, Neo asks Morpheus what the hell is going on, and what exactly is he talking about?? Without hesitation, Morpheus replies to him, “You are the one Neo — You see, you may have spent the last few years looking for me, but I have spent my entire life looking for you.”

This is perhaps the most important lesson the new Truth seeker must eventually come to learn — We are the ones we have been waiting for to change this corrupt world my friends; and we must stop looking for heroes and human leaders to absolve us of this very serious responsibility. Instead, we must all take on the role of Morpheus — which is to awaken as many Neo’s (new minds) as we possibly can, whilst also taking on the role that represents the journey of Neo, by challenging ourselves to become the best version of who we authentically are.

By doing this, we will help to awaken and unleash the unique creative forces of each individual’s problem solving imagination; and we will also find unity in our shared struggle against the injustices, and corruption, of this inhumane system which invariably exploits us all.

If not us, then who? And if not now, then when?

Written by Gavin Nascimento, Founder of aNewKindOfHuman.com

Sign up for my email newsletter HERE

Find me also on;
Facebook
Instagram
Minds.com

All my work is open source and I encourage it to be reproduced. I only ask that you give me credit, and include my social media profiles — as listed in the EXACT FORMAT above — in an effort to help me build a formidable following of people truly intent on learning and creating positive change. If you are not willing to do that, you are NOT permitted to use my work.




Most Effective Ways To Stop Police Brutality

The issue of police brutality has been one of the defining issues of 2020 and the 21st century in general because of several high-profile incidents of suspects dying while in police custody. Regardless of whether you believe in the “a few bad apples” theory or believe that the problem is more systemic, clearly it is a problem that needs to be addressed. There is no one simple solution to stopping police brutality but solving it should be on the police departments and the local governments. However, in some cases it is the citizens who can help to stop it as well.

When a person is brutalized by the police, it is a violation of their civil rights, which means that they can sue the officer or police department that perpetrated the abuse. In order to do that, they will need the help of a police harassment lawyer to help them with their case. Past and current events have shown that taking a case against the police can be challenging and there are many obstacles on the path to justice. But an experienced civil rights attorney can surmount those obstacles and challenges to get victims of police brutality the justice that they deserve.

What is Police Brutality?

Police brutality is defined as the undue and excessive use of force against civilians by law enforcement officers. We are familiar with the more violent forms of police brutality like assault, harsh restraint methods, and even death. However police brutality can also encompass behaviour like false arrest, verbal abuse, intimidation, harassment, and other kinds of mistreatment.

How To Stop Police Brutality

There are several methods proposed by various experts that if implemented, could reduce the instances of police brutality.

Better Data Tracking – If there were more comprehensive data on the instances of brutality or killings by the police, then it would be easier to get a handle on the problem. Unfortunately, the data on police violence is often inaccurate, unreliable, and incomplete, which makes it hard to gauge where and how often excessive use of force by the police occurs.

Changing the Police Culture – Many experts agree that better training that emphasizes de-escalation would help to reduce police brutality across the country. This includes the banning of techniques like chokeholds and strangleholds as well as using violence as a last resort. Additionally, changes should be made that would make it easier to discipline police officers who fall out of line.

Demilitarization – Many police departments take a more militarized approach to policing after acquiring gear donated by the military. This military equipment is linked to a rise in police killings by departments that use them. Since the increased use of military equipment is linked with a more violent approach to problems by the police, many civilians and politicians want to reduce the militarization and use of military equipment by the police. The militarized approach to policing often gives the police a warlike “us vs them” mentality that is detrimental to good policing.

Community Policing – In neighborhoods where crime is rampant, the police tend to flood those neighborhoods, which leads to over policing, which in turn leads to a crackdown on relatively minor crimes, which then leads to suspicion and distrust of the police. Instead many experts want more social welfare programs in those neighborhoods instead of having police on every corner. That can help to reduce crime in those neighborhoods without the use of excessive force by the police.

Better Oversight – Civilian and independent oversight of police departments could help to reduce acts of police brutality. However, reports of police brutality are often ignored or dismissed, especially if they are made by minorities. The expanded use of bystander video to record instances of police brutality as they happen is one method of oversight, but there needs to be more official forms of oversight as well.

Police Brutality Needs to End

Police brutality does not just affect the people who are on the receiving end of the brutality, it affects everyone else as well. The reason is that police brutality erodes people’s trust in the police. That can make it less likely that they will cooperate with the police, which can embolden criminals. Ultimately all citizens, as well as the police themselves are hurt by police brutality.

That is why reforms need to be put in place that will lessen instances of police brutality and hold officers accountable for their actions. If you were a victim of police brutality, then you should contact an attorney to help you since the police are highly protected and it can be difficult to take them on by yourself.




Signed As Law: Vermont Bans Police Use of Facial Recognition Technology

facial recognition software
Technology vector created by gstudioimagen – www.freepik.com

By Michael Maharrey | Activist Post

MONTPELIER, Vt. (Oct. 15, 2020) – Last week, Vermont Gov. Phil Scott signed a bill into law that bans police from using facial recognition technology. The growing movement to prohibit the use of facial recognition at the state and local levels could hinder the operation of a growing national facial recognition network.

Sen. Jeanette White (D-Putney) introduced Senate Bill 124 (S.124) back in February. The legislation makes a number of reforms relating to law enforcement, including a complete ban on the use of facial recognition technology unless it “is authorized by an enactment of the General Assembly.” The law prohibits the use of facial recognition technology and the use of any information acquired through facial recognition. It does make an exception if the use of facial recognition is allowable under the state law regulating police drones – permissible only with a warrant.

The Senate passed S.124 in June by a 28-0 vote. The House approved the measure with some amendments on Sept. 22. The Senate concurred with the amendments and Gov. Scott signed the bill into law on Oct. 7.

The new law establishes the strongest limits on the police use of facial recognition in the country. ACLU of Vermont Advocacy Director Falko Schilling called it “a historic win for Vermonters’ right to privacy.”

By enacting the broadest outright ban on police use of facial recognition in the country, Vermont has taken the lead in protecting residents’ civil liberties from this invasive and inaccurate technology.

IMPACT ON FEDERAL PROGRAMS

recent report revealed that the federal government has turned state drivers’ license photos into a giant facial recognition database, putting virtually every driver in America in a perpetual electronic police lineup. The revelations generated widespread outrage, but this story isn’t new. The federal government has been developing a massive, nationwide facial recognition system for years.

The FBI rolled out a nationwide facial-recognition program in the fall of 2014, with the goal of building a giant biometric database with pictures provided by the states and corporate friends.

In 2016, the Center on Privacy and Technology at Georgetown Law released “The Perpetual Lineup,” a massive report on law enforcement use of facial recognition technology in the U.S. You can read the complete report at perpetuallineup.org. The organization conducted a year-long investigation and collected more than 15,000 pages of documents through more than 100 public records requests. The report paints a disturbing picture of intense cooperation between the federal government, and state and local law enforcement to develop a massive facial recognition database.

“Face recognition is a powerful technology that requires strict oversight. But those controls, by and large, don’t exist today,” report co-author Clare Garvie said. “With only a few exceptions, there are no laws governing police use of the technology, no standards ensuring its accuracy, and no systems checking for bias. It’s a wild west.”

There are many technical and legal problems with facial recognition, including significant concerns about the accuracy of the technology, particularly when reading the facial features of minority populations. During a test run by the ACLU of Northern California, facial recognition misidentified 26 members of the California legislature as people in a database of arrest photos.

With facial recognition technology, police and other government officials have the capability to track individuals in real-time. These systems allow law enforcement agents to use video cameras and continually scan everybody who walks by. According to the report, several major police departments have expressed an interest in this type of real-time tracking. Documents revealed agencies in at least five major cities, including Los Angeles, either claimed to run real-time face recognition off of street cameras, bought technology with the capability, or expressed written interest in buying it.

In all likelihood, the federal government heavily involves itself in helping state and local agencies obtain this technology. The feds provide grant money to local law enforcement agencies for a vast array of surveillance gear, including ALPRs, stingray devices and drones. The federal government essentially encourages and funds a giant nationwide surveillance net and then taps into the information via fusion centers and the Information Sharing Environment (ISE).

Fusion centers were sold as a tool to combat terrorism, but that is not how they are being used. The ACLU pointed to a bipartisan congressional report to demonstrate the true nature of government fusion centers: “They haven’t contributed anything meaningful to counterterrorism efforts. Instead, they have largely served as police surveillance and information sharing nodes for law enforcement efforts targeting the frequent subjects of police attention: Black and brown people, immigrants, dissidents, and the poor.”

Fusion centers operate within the broader ISE. According to its website, the ISE “provides analysts, operators, and investigators with information needed to enhance national security. These analysts, operators, and investigators…have mission needs to collaborate and share information with each other and with private sector partners and our foreign allies.” In other words, ISE serves as a conduit for the sharing of information gathered without a warrant. Known ISE partners include the Office of Director of National Intelligence which oversees 17 federal agencies and organizations, including the NSA. ISE utilizes these partnerships to collect and share data on the millions of unwitting people they track.

Reports that the Berkeley Police Department in cooperation with a federal fusion center deployed cameras equipped to surveil a “free speech” rally and Antifa counterprotests provided the first solid link between the federal government and local authorities in facial recognition surveillance.

In a nutshell, without state and local cooperation, the feds have a much more difficult time gathering information. Passage of state laws and local ordinances banning and limiting facial recognition eliminates one avenue for gathering facial recognition data. Simply put, data that doesn’t exist cannot be entered into federal databases.

Source: Tenth Amendment Center

Michael Maharrey [send him email] is the Communications Director for the Tenth Amendment Center. He is from the original home of the Principles of ’98 – Kentucky and currently resides in northern Florida. See his blog archive here and his article archive here.He is the author of the book, Our Last Hope: Rediscovering the Lost Path to Liberty. You can visit his personal website at MichaelMaharrey.com and like him on Facebook HERE




Grim New Study Calculates How Many Times Per Week Security Cameras Record Americans

camera surveillance

By Jake Anderson |  The Mind Unleashed

By now most Americans are keenly aware of the vast surveillance infrastructure tracking our everyday movements. From intersection cameras watching us while we drive to the eyes of corporate surveillance in the workplace, retail stores, and even our own homes, Americans are recorded on camera many times each day and week.

Now a new study by Safety.org is here to tell us exactly how many times….and the answer may surprise you. Using IPUMS Time Use data, researchers calculated that the average American is recorded by surveillance technology at least 238 times each week.

The number could be much higher – thousands of times per week – for people who frequently travel by plane or work in high-security jobs.

The study breaks down the number into several different categories. The largest contributor to surveillance camera uses is roadways and intersections, where cameras embedded in traffic lights record the average American motorist 160 times per week.

The next categories are work – which researchers say involves the typical employee being recorded 40 times a week in the office – and retail shopping, which contributes to another 24 average weekly instances.

The most surprising category, according to researchers, regarded home and neighborhood surveillance. Home entertainment devices and gadgets, as well as the proliferation of doorbell cameras, make your daily walks or jogging regimen a new source of daily surveillance. While in previous decades Americans could expect to remain unobserved in the privacy of their own home/neighborhood, the average citizen is now surveilled 14 times a week.

The increasing use of advanced surveillance tactics by police also adds to the rising numbers.

“The notion of doing biometric identity checks on millions of people to identify a handful of suspects is completely unprecedented,” says Silkie Carlo, director of Big Brother Watch. “There is no legal basis to do that. It takes us hurtling down the road towards a much more expansive surveillance state.”

Safety.org says that these numbers will rise as surveillance technology becomes increasingly ubiquitous. Facial recognition software alone will contribute considerably to this rise. The researchers believe that by 2021, there will be about a billion cameras recording humans globally. Only China, which is soon to have a security camera for every 4.1 of its citizens, will have a more invasive surveillance state apparatus than the U.S.

The number arrived at – 238 – is certainly shocking but may not even be the full story. When you consider another kind of surveillance – data tracking and harvesting by online advertisers and Internet service providers – and our increasing use of mobile devices that record and triangulate our locations and movements, security cameras are only one facet of the issue.

Biological and epidemiological tracking, buoyed by contact tracing efforts in the coronavirus age, is also expected to add dramatically to the surveillance state. For example, some health officials say there is a need to integrate real-time data between healthcare systems and the private sector.

“The price of this escape route is an unprecedented increase in digital surveillance,” says a new report about contact tracing in the UK. “In normal times, the degree of monitoring and state intervention we are talking about here would be out of the question in liberal democracies. But these are not normal times, and the alternatives are even more unpalatable.”




Judge Upends Vallejo, California’s Use of Stingray Surveillance

cellular phone

[Image courtesy of @daria | Pexels.com]

 

By Matthew Guariglia | Electronic Frontier Foundation

 

Cops in Vallejo have put their controversial cell-phone surveillance tool back in the box, after a judge released a tentative ruling (which the judge might or might not later finalize or amend) that they’d acquired it in violation of state law. The case was brought by Oakland Privacy,  the EFF Pioneer Award Winning organization and Electronic Frontiers Alliance member.

They allege that the city of Vallejo, California, may not use its cellular surveillance tool (often called a cell site simulator or stingray) because the police failed to get explicit approval from the city council, following input from residents, of an adequate privacy policy governing its use. According to the tentative ruling (again, it is not final), police must acquire from Vallejo City council a “resolution or ordinance authorizing a specific usage and privacy policy regarding that technology and meeting the requirements” of the state statute.

The City Council assembled via teleconference in spring 2020, amidst a state-wide pandemic related shelter-in-place order, to vote for the purchase of this controversial piece of surveillance equipment. It did so without adequately obtaining input from the public.

What’s worse, the city council approved the purchase in violation of state law (S.B. 741) regulating the acquisition of such technology. To ensure democratic control over whether police may obtain cell-site simulators, the California legislature passed it in 2015. EFF advocated to enact it. The law prohibits local government agencies from acquiring cell-site simulators without the local governing body approving a specific privacy and usage policy that “is consistent with respect for an individual’s privacy and civil liberties.” This policy needs to be available to the public, published online, and voted on during an open hearing. But the Vallejo city council did not consider and approve such a policy when it purported to approve purchase of the technology.

After the judge’s tentative ruling, the Vallejo City Council announced it would be putting a privacy and use policy for this already-purchased machine on the docket for public discussion on October 27. As Oakland Privacy writes on their blog, “This meeting will provide an opportunity for Vallejo residents to read, review and comment upon the policy prior to adoption by the City.” We urge members of the public to turn out and voice their concerns about Vallejo police obtaining expensive new surveillance technology that can intrude on privacy, chill free speech, and disparately burden people of color.

A cell-site simulator pretends to act as a cell tower in order to locate cellular devices that connect to it. Cell phones in an area connect to the device rather than the actual tower, allowing police to see unique identifiers that could be used to identify or track people. Police most commonly use cell site simulators to locate a known phone in an unknown location (for example, to find a person wanted on a warrant), or to identify the unknown phones in a known location (for example, to learn the identity of protesters at a rally).

READ THE REST OF THIS ARTICLE…..




Microchips, Nanotechnology and Implanted Biosensors: The New Normal?

nanotechnology

[Image courtesy of @alipazani | Pexels.com ]

By Pam Long | Children’s Health Defense

U.S. military personnel will be the first subjects in nanotechnology trials in the pursuit of optimizing health and early detection of disease outbreaks. Profusa has research contracts for bio-integrated sensors with the U.S. Department of Defense and Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), pending U.S. Food and Drug Administration approval in early 2021.

Health technology undermines freedom and privacy

Profusa’s promotional video shows how the bio-integrated sensor enables a soldier to be tracked by remote computers using GPS in addition to monitoring real-time biomarkers, such as oxygen levels and heart rate. While this biotechnology is portrayed as potentially lifesaving to a soldier on the battlefield, the implications of GPS tracking individuals is a terrifying step towards a surveillance state in the general population. Furthermore, tracking people in stages of sickness can only result in medical tyranny in the hands of any government. The Profusa influenza study requires patients to wear the wearable version of the reader 24 hours a day, with continuous biomarker information collection into a database, and aims to detect four stages of infection: healthy, infected, asymptomatic and recovery stage. These unreliable detection stages could become the criteria for different levels of individual participation in society as experienced in the unsustainable COVID-19 state-level lockdowns for the masses.

Can it be reversed? Can it be refused?

This Profusa nanotechnology has three components: an inserted sensor called hydrogel, a light-emitting fluorescent sensor reader on the surface of the skin and an electronic software component that transmits to an online database. The SARS-CoV-2 vaccine plans to incorporate this technology and there is no information on how the technology could be removed, if at all. “Tiny biosensors that become one with the body” could imply a lifetime commitment.

The nanotechnology research at DARPA is very controversial and aims to create “super soldiers” with artificial intelligence that gives enhanced capabilities to humans such as heightened senses, tenfold vision and extraordinary strength. According to a statement from DARPA, the program, known as the Neural Engineering System Design, “aims to develop an implantable neural interface able to provide advanced signal resolution and data-transfer bandwidth between the brain and electronics.” Would these “super powers” and any side effects be permanent or life-limiting? The webpage of DARPA’s program notes that “the most effective, state-of-the-art neural interfaces require surgery to implant electrodes into the brain.”

Is it ethical to require a soldier to implant nanotechnology as mission essential or for force protection? Can military personnel refuse nanotechnology embedded in a vaccine mandate or health order from the chain of command? Informed and uncoerced consent is the foundation of medical ethics.

Vaccines: the trojan horse for worldwide adoption of nanotechnology?

The Institute for Soldiers Nanotechnologies at MIT and the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases are researching the use of nanotechnology based adjuvants in new vaccines for the military against malaria, tuberculosis, HIV and Ebola.

According to this document, “Project 1.6 proposes to develop two platform technologies that safely and efficiently promote immune responses in the vaccination and therapeutic settings: lymph node targeting amphiphile-adjuvants and immune-targeting amphiphilic ligand-coated metal nanoparticles. These two approaches are ideally suited to targeting adjuvant compounds to lymphoid tissues and immunomodulators to immune cells during infection, respectively.”

In addition to the concerns of experimental vaccines for military personnel, civilians will likely follow in vaccine mandates with nanotechnology. Tracking individual location and personal metabolic data is far too much power for any government or health department. And moreover, if the technology can send biochemistry signals from the person to the government, then likely the technology has capability to also send biochemistry altering signals from the government to the person. What are the limitations and safeguards for the government’s remote ability to affect or control a person’s thoughts, emotions and vital functioning? Nanotechnology could give data-based omnipotence to the controllers and create an oppressive world of governance in the guise of public health.

What you can do? Become more empowered to advocate for your health by registering for the Protecting Health and Autonomy in the 21st Century online conference Oct. 16-18 with 40 speakers, including Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.

© [October 1, 2020] Children’s Health Defense, Inc. This work is reproduced and distributed with the permission of Children’s Health Defense, Inc. Want to learn more from Children’s Health Defense? Sign up for free news and updates from Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and the Children’s Health Defense. Your donation will help to support us in our efforts.




Before They Assassinated Him This Black Panther United All Races Against The ‘Elite’

love not war

By Gavin Nascimento | A New Kind Of Human

At the young age of just 21 years old, this Black Panther leader managed to pull off what many at the time considered to be impossible — uniting different races and seemingly opposed political groups in common cause against the ruling class.

Some say this is the true reason why he was assassinated.

Sadly, very few people today know who Fred Hampton really was, what he truly stood for, and how he was brutally assassinated. In this blog I will not be exploring the complexity and exceptional integrity of this man’s character in detail, since I believe he is deserving of a much more meticulous write up than I can offer at this time. Nonetheless, I would like to share his transcendent message of unity and solidarity to help remind everyone who the real enemy is. Please feel free to take and share any of these quotes from this article. His message is extremely important.

Rising quickly within the ranks of the Black Panther Party in Chicago, under Fred Hampton’s leadership they were feeding more hungry children free meals than ever before through the BPP Free Breakfast Program. The group also offered free healthcare to those in need; safe transportation for the elderly and they provided education to children and adults on subjects like political science, and other relevant topics, that were (and still are) sorely lacking from government controlled education. Perhaps most controversial, but well known today, is that they also had patrol units that would police the police, and ensure the cops were not violating anyone’s constitutional rights.

Fred Hampton also managed to broker a peace between some of Chicago’s most powerful gangs and formerly opposed groups, by helping them become aware of their mutual struggles and human principles. It was through these brilliant communication skills that he was also able to coordinate the establishment of the “Rainbow Coalition,” which brought together the Young Lords (Largely representing poor Latinos), Young Patriots (Largely representing poor Whites), and the Black Panthers. The group would also later be joined by a number of other revolutionary groups from other walks of life, including the mostly White Students for a Democratic Society, the mostly Mexican Brown Berets, the American Indian Movement and the mostly Chinese Red Guard Party, amongst others.

U.S. Government Counters Fred Hampton’s Efforts For Unity By Weaponizing Racism & Spreading Divide & Conquer Propaganda

According to FBI documents, Fred Hampton was considered a major threat to the U.S. government, as was the Black Panther Party in general. In fact, the FBI Head at that time, J, Edgar Hoover, considered them to be “the most dangerous group in the U.S.” and viewed their Free Breakfast Program to be a top priority to undermine since it was gaining so much public support.

According to historian Franziska Meister, this resulted in parents being told food was contaminated with venereal disease in an effort to shut them down; parents were also told that the youth were being indoctrinated to hate white people and even become killers. Police officials also raided these Breakfast gatherings randomly and openly harassed BPP members which terrified attending kids. In Los Angeles, police officials reportedly forced children to leave at gun point and then threw out all of the food. Bear in mind that these programs were feeding ±20,000 hungry children every school day.

The FBI resorted to even more reprehensible methods to create division between some of the more militant groups that the Black Panther Party members worked so hard to unite with, such as the Blackstone Rangers and the United Slaves (US). They did this by falsely insinuating that the BPP put out an assassination hit on the head of the United Slaves, Ron Karenga, and that Fred Hampton personally put out a hit on the head of the Blackstone Rangers. This resulted in a “gang war” that saw 4 members of the BPP being killed and many more, on all sides, being injured. They were also successful at creating division within the Black Panther Party itself.

In 1971, it was discovered that this was all part of a shocking illegal secretive FBI program known as COINTELPRO, where the FBI illegally targeted anti-war activists and civil rights groups, amongst others.

The Ruling Class Fear Unity & Favor Racism & Division

When we consider the elaborate tactics employed by the establishment authorities to sabotage the Black Panther Party’s efforts to promote unity and peace amongst different gangs, racial groups, and the oppressed masses in general — which was truly an unprecedented and extraordinary accomplishment — one can’t help but logically consider that they actually favor racism, division and war, over unity and peace.

This becomes particularly propitious, when we consider the bizarre case of another high ranking member of the group, Elmer “Geronimo” Pratt, who was also a highly decorated soldier that rose to the position of sergeant whilst in the military. He was wrongfully imprisoned for 27 years — 8 of which were served out in solitary confinement. He was finally released after it was discovered that the prosecution knowingly concealed evidence that could prove his innocence — which is simply mind blowing to say the least. In 2000, he reportedly settled his false imprisonment case for $4.5 million. Sadly, he had a heart attack just a few years later and died.

A number of other BPP members were killed or imprisoned on various charges as well. How many of them were authentic and how many were the result of manipulation is something we may never know. In the case of Fred Hampton and Mark Clark, it is open knowledge today that police officials outright murdered them by raiding their residence while most of the group were sleeping. It was also later found that Hampton had been drugged, which some people believe may have been the work of his personal bodyguard, who was later exposed as an undercover FBI agent. After more than a decade of legal battles surrounding their murders — which the authorities first tried to cover up — the government reportedly paid $1.85 million to the parents of the slain victims, and other plaintiffs in 1982. To go to such extraordinary lengths to suppress this movement is simply uncanny and should warrant further interest from us for obvious reasons.

The True Black Panther Legacy Has Been Poisoned

Despite Fred Hampton and other Black Panther Party leader’s noble efforts, and sacrifices, to unite different races in common cause against a mutual enemy — and thus focus our collective capabilities in helping all oppressed people regardless of skin color — today their message of “fighting racism with solidarity“(unity) seems to have largely been lost.

Where once the BPP rightfully acknowledged the palpable struggles of impoverished white people, for example — which naturally resulted in a stronger sense of unity and camaraderie to create a better world for all — today this demographic is largely being forgotten about through the oversimplification of their existence to one of “privilege,” which sadly only serves to radicalize their unvented frustrations further, and make them ripe pickings for those with sinister agendas who pretend to care.

In addition to this departure from the original Black Panther Party’s code of conduct to create positive change, today many people — particularly white people — appear to be under the false pretense that the BPP was an anti-white organization, which is absolutely not true. In fact, they constantly went out of their way to make that very clear and even isolated themselves from more extreme black nationalist groups that viewed all white people as being the enemy.

One of the reasons that this myth persists today, I believe, is a very dodgy modern organization proclaiming themselves to be the “new” Black Panther Party, but their ideology and political position is clearly one of racial intolerance and even outright hatred for white people, to the point of openly advocating killing babies. This is a major insult to what the original Black Panther Party stood for. In fact, multiple original BPP members have made it very clear that they want nothing to do with this “new” organization. As co-founder Bobby Seale commented on CNN when asked about the group, “We will never, ever stoop to the low level of the mentality of a racist to just hate another person because of the color of their skin or ethnicity. We don’t do that. That’s not the goal objective. The goal objective is human liberation.” When invited to debate with Bobby Seale, the “new” BPP reportedly declined.

READ THE REST OF THIS ARTICLE….. 




Newly Released Footage Shows Police Shooting 13-Year-Old Autistic Boy 11 Times

police car

By John Vibes |  The Mind Unleashed

A 13-year-old named Linden Cameron was shot 11 times by Salt Lake City police earlier this month, after police were called to his house because he was having a mental breakdown. The body camera videos of the officers involved were posted to YouTube by the Salt Lake City Police Department on Monday. The video shows that the young man was running away from a group of police when one of them opened fire on him, shooting him 11 times.

The officers were called the boy’s home by his mother, Golda Barton, who told officers that her son was on the autism spectrum. She also told them that he doesn’t like police because they killed his grandfather, and also mentioned that he may have been carrying a fake gun. This woman either lives under a rock and is totally unaware of the many fatal encounters that police have with people on the autism spectrum, or she wanted to get her son killed. She says that she called the officers to de-escalate the situation, which was obviously an incredibly naive and foolish thing to do.

One of the female officers on the scene could be heard expressing caution about the situation, and suggesting that maybe this isn’t a job that the police should be handling.

This is a psych problem. I don’t see why we even have to approach. Honestly, we can call sergeant and tell him the situation, because I’m not about to get into a shooting because he’s upset. This is exactly what we talked about last week. If no one’s in the house and no one is in danger, maybe he’s probably breaking stuff but he’s not harming himself. Sorry, I’m not about to get into a shooting,” the officer can be heard saying.

Sadly, the other officers on the scene didn’t take her advice. A few moments later, police went and knocked on the door, causing Cameron to flee through the backyard. After a short chase, Cameron was shot 11 times by one of the officers.

The video ends with Cameron saying “I don’t feel good. Tell my mom I love her,” as he is laying on the ground.

Police handcuffed him first, and then made a half-hearted effort at giving him medical attention. Luckily, Cameron was able to survive but he is still in very serious conditions and will be left with injuries that will be with him fro the rest of his life. When he was taken to the hospital, he was initially in critical condition with bullet wounds to his intestines, bladder, shoulder, and ankles. He is still in the hospital and has been having trouble speaking. He has also lost feeling in one of his arms, and doctors don’t expect him to be able to walk again.

During a press conference, SLCPD Chief Mike Brown admitted that Cameron and many other victims of police violence were not doing anything criminal.

“We are facing a mental health crisis in this country. We want to be partners with those who provide mental health services. As a community, we need to find a way forward. Too often, our officers are called to deal with these difficult problems, which frequently are not criminal in nature,” Brown said during a press conference this week.

 




Justice Sleeps and ‘We the People’ Suffer: No, The U.S. Supreme Court Will Not Save Us

By John W. Whitehead | The Rutherford Institute

“The Constitution is not neutral. It was designed to take the government off the backs of the people.”—Justice William O. Douglas

The U.S. Supreme Court will not save us.

It doesn’t matter which party gets to pick the replacement to fill Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg’s seat on the U.S. Supreme Court. The battle that is gearing up right now is yet more distraction and spin to keep us oblivious to the steady encroachment on our rights by the architects of the American Police State.

Americans can no longer rely on the courts to mete out justice.

Although the courts were established to serve as Courts of Justice, what we have been saddled with, instead, are Courts of Order. This is true at all levels of the judiciary, but especially so in the highest court of the land, the U.S. Supreme Court, which is seemingly more concerned with establishing order and protecting government interests than with upholding the rights of the people enshrined in the U.S. Constitution.

As a result, the police and other government agents have been generally empowered to probe, poke, pinch, taser, search, seize, strip, and generally manhandle anyone they see fit in almost any circumstance, all with the general blessing of the courts.

Rarely do the concerns of the populace prevail.

When presented with an opportunity to loosen the government’s noose that keeps getting cinched tighter and tighter around the necks of the American people, what does our current Supreme Court usually do?

It ducks. Prevaricates. Remains silent. Speaks to the narrowest possible concern.

More often than not, it gives the government and its corporate sponsors the benefit of the doubt, which leaves “we the people” hanging by a thread.

Rarely do the justices of the U.S. Supreme Court— preoccupied with their personal politics, cocooned in a world of privilege, partial to those with power, money, and influence, and narrowly focused on a shrinking docket (the court accepts on average 80 cases out of 8,000 each year)—venture beyond their rarefied comfort zones.

Every so often, the justices toss a bone to those who fear they have abdicated their allegiance to the Constitution. Too often, however, the Supreme Court tends to march in lockstep with the police state.

In recent years, for example, the Court has ruled that police officer can use lethal force in car chases without fear of lawsuits; police officers can stop cars based only on “anonymous” tips; Secret Service agents are not accountable for their actions, as long as they’re done in the name of “security”; citizens only have a right to remain silent if they assert it; police have free reign to use drug-sniffing dogs as “search warrants on leashes,” justifying any and all police searches of vehicles stopped on the roadside; police can forcibly take your DNA, whether or not you’ve been convicted of a crime; police can stop, search, question and profile citizens and non-citizens alike; police can subject Americans to virtual strip searches, no matter the “offense”; police can break into homes without a warrant, even if it’s the wrong home; and it’s a crime to not identify yourself when a policeman asks your name.

The cases the Supreme Court refuses to hear, allowing lower court judgments to stand, are almost as critical as the ones they rule on. Some of these cases have delivered devastating blows to the lives and rights enshrined in the Constitution. By remaining silent, the Court has affirmed that: legally owning a firearm is enough to justify a no-knock raid by police; the military can arrest and detain American citizens; students can be subjected to random lockdowns and mass searches at school; and police officers who don’t know their actions violate the law aren’t guilty of breaking the law.

Do you think you’ve got rights? Think again.

All of those freedoms we cherish—the ones enshrined in the Constitution, the ones that affirm our right to free speech and assembly, due process, privacy, bodily integrity, the right to not have police seize our property without a warrant, or search and detain us without probable cause—amount to nothing when the government and its agents are allowed to disregard those prohibitions on government overreach at will.

This is the grim reality of life in the American police state.

In fact, our so-called rights have been reduced to technicalities in the face of the government’s ongoing power grabs.

In the police state being erected around us, the police can probe, poke, pinch, taser, search, seize, strip, and generally manhandle anyone they see fit in almost any circumstance, all with the general blessing of the courts.

This is what one would call a slow death by a thousand cuts, only it’s the Fourth Amendment being inexorably bled to death by the very institution that is supposed to be protecting it (and us) from government abuse.

Remember, it was a unanimous Supreme Court that determined that police officer may use drug-sniffing dogs to conduct warrantless searches of cars during routine traffic stops. That same Court gave police the green light to taser defenseless motorists, strip search non-violent suspects arrested for minor incidents, and break down people’s front doors without evidence that they have done anything wrong.

Make no mistake about it: this is what constitutes “law and order” in the American police state.

These are the hallmarks of the emerging American police state, where police officers, no longer mere servants of the people entrusted with keeping the peace, are part of an elite ruling class dependent on keeping the masses corralled, under control, and treated like suspects and enemies rather than citizens.

Whether it’s police officers breaking through people’s front doors and shooting them dead in their homes or strip-searching motorists on the side of the road, in a police state such as ours, these instances of abuse are not condemned by the government. Rather, they are continually validated by a judicial system that kowtows to every police demand, no matter how unjust, no matter how in opposition to the Constitution.

The system is rigged.

Because the system is rigged and the U.S. Supreme Court—the so-called “people’s court”—has exchanged its appointed role as a gatekeeper of justice for its new role as maintainer of the status quo, the police state will keep winning and “we the people” will keep losing.

By refusing to accept any of the eight or so qualified immunity cases before it this past term that strove to hold police accountable for official misconduct, the Supreme Court delivered a chilling reminder that in the American police state, ‘we the people’ are at the mercy of law enforcement officers who have almost absolute discretion to decide who is a threat, what constitutes resistance, and how harshly they can deal with the citizens they were appointed to ‘serve and protect.”

This is how qualified immunity keeps the police state in power.

Lawyers tend to offer a lot of complicated, convoluted explanations for the doctrine of qualified immunity, which was intended to insulate government officials from frivolous lawsuits, but the real purpose of qualified immunity is to rig the system, ensuring that abusive agents of the government almost always win and the victims of government abuse almost always lose.

How else do you explain a doctrine that requires victims of police violence to prove that their abusers knew their behavior was illegal because it had been deemed so in a nearly identical case at some prior time?

It’s a setup for failure.

A review of critical court rulings over the past several decades, including rulings affirming qualified immunity protections for government agents by the U.S. Supreme Court, reveals a startling and steady trend towards pro-police state rulings by an institution concerned more with establishing order, protecting the ruling class, and insulating government agents from charges of wrongdoing than with upholding the rights enshrined in the Constitution.

Indeed, as Reuters reports, qualified immunity “has become a nearly failsafe tool to let police brutality go unpunished and deny victims their constitutional rights.”

Worse, as Reuters concluded, “the Supreme Court has built qualified immunity into an often insurmountable police defense by intervening in cases mostly to favor the police.”

For those in need of a reminder of all the ways in which the Supreme Court has made us sitting ducks at the mercy of the American police state, let me offer the following.

As a result of court rulings in recent years, police can claim qualified immunity for warrantless searches. Police can claim qualified immunity for warrantless arrests based on mere suspicion. Police can claim qualified immunity for using excessive force against protesters. Police can claim qualified immunity for shooting a fleeing suspect in the back. Police can claim qualified immunity for shooting a mentally impaired person. Police officers can use lethal force in car chases without fear of lawsuits. Police can stop, arrest and search citizens without reasonable suspicion or probable cause.  Police officers can stop cars based on “anonymous” tips or for “suspicious” behavior such as having a reclined car seat or driving too carefully. Police can forcibly take your DNA, whether or not you’ve been convicted of a crime.  Police can use the “fear for my life” rationale as an excuse for shooting unarmed individuals. Police have free reign to use drug-sniffing dogs as “search warrants on leashes.” Not only are police largely protected by qualified immunity, but police dogs are also off the hook for wrongdoing.

Police can subject Americans to strip searches, no matter the “offense.” Police can break into homes without a warrant, even if it’s the wrong home. Police can use knock-and-talk tactics as a means of sidestepping the Fourth Amendment. Police can carry out no-knock raids if they believe announcing themselves would be dangerous. Police can recklessly open fire on anyone that might be “armed.” Police can destroy a home during a SWAT raid, even if the owner gives their consent to enter and search it. Police can suffocate someone, deliberately or inadvertently, in the process of subduing them.

To sum it up, we are dealing with a nationwide epidemic of court-sanctioned police violence carried out with impunity against individuals posing little or no real threat. In this way, the justices of the United States Supreme Court—through their deference to police power, preference for security over freedom, and evisceration of our most basic rights for the sake of order and expediency—have become the architects of the American police state.

So where does that leave us?

For those deluded enough to believe that they’re living the American dream—where the government represents the people, where the people are equal in the eyes of the law, where the courts are arbiters of justice, where the police are keepers of the peace, and where the law is applied equally as a means of protecting the rights of the people—it’s time to wake up.

We no longer have a representative government, a rule of law, or justice.

Liberty has fallen to legalism. Freedom has fallen to fascism.

Justice has become jaded, jaundiced, and just plain unjust.

And for too many, the American dream of freedom and opportunity has turned into a living nightmare.

Given the turbulence of our age, with its police overreach, military training drills on American soil, domestic surveillance, SWAT team raids, asset forfeiture, wrongful convictions, profit-driven prisons, and corporate corruption, the need for a guardian of the people’s rights has never been greater.

Yet as I make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People,, neither the president, nor the legislatures, nor the courts will save us from the police state that holds us in its clutches.

So we can waste our strength over the next few weeks and months raging over the makeup of the Supreme Court or we can stand united against the tyrant in our midst.

After all, the president, the legislatures, and the courts are all on the government’s payroll.

They are the police state.

ABOUT JOHN W. WHITEHEAD

Constitutional attorney and author John W. Whitehead is founder and president of The Rutherford Institute. His new book Battlefield America: The War on the American People is available at www.amazon.com. Whitehead can be contacted at johnw@rutherford.org.




Virtual School Dangers: The Hazards Of A Police State Education During COVID-19

By John W. Whitehead | Rutherford

“There was of course no way of knowing whether you were being watched at any given moment. How often, or on what system, the Thought Police plugged in on any individual wire was guesswork. It was even conceivable that they watched everybody all the time. But at any rate they could plug in your wire whenever they wanted to. You had to live—did live, from habit that became instinct—in the assumption that every sound you made was overheard, and, except in darkness, every movement scrutinized.”—George Orwell, 1984

Once upon a time in America, parents breathed a sigh of relief when their kids went back to school after a summer’s hiatus, content in the knowledge that for a good portion of the day, their kids would be gainfully occupied, out of harm’s way, and out of trouble.

Back then, if you talked back to a teacher, or played a prank on a classmate, or just failed to do your homework, you might find yourself in detention or doing an extra writing assignment after school or suffering through a parent-teacher conference about your shortcomings.

Of course, that was before school shootings became a part of our national lexicon.

As a result, over the course of the past 30 years, the need to keep the schools “safe” from drugs and weapons has become a thinly disguised, profit-driven campaign to transform them into quasi-prisons, complete with surveillance cameras, metal detectors, police patrols, zero tolerance policies, lock downs, drug sniffing dogs, school resource officers, strip searches, and active shooter drills.

Suddenly, under school zero tolerance policies, students were being punished with suspension, expulsion, and even arrest for childish behavior and minor transgressions such as playing cops and robbers on the playground, bringing LEGOs to school, or having a food fight.

Things got even worse once schools started to rely on police (school resource officers) to “deal with minor rule breaking: sagging pants, disrespectful comments, brief physical skirmishes.”

As a result, students are being subjected to police tactics such as handcuffs, leg shackles, tasers and excessive force for “acting up,” in addition to being ticketed, fined and sent to court for behavior perceived as defiant, disruptive or disorderly such as spraying perfume and writing on a desk.

This is what constitutes a police state education these days: lessons in compliance meted out with aggressive, totalitarian tactics.

The COVID-19 pandemic has added yet another troubling layer to the ways in which students (and their families) can run afoul of a police state education now that school (virtual or in-person) is back in session.

Significant numbers of schools within the nation’s 13,000 school districts have opted to hold their classes online, in-person or a hybrid of the two, fearing further outbreaks of the virus. Yet this unprecedented foray into the virtual world carries its own unique risks.

Apart from the technological logistics of ensuring that millions of students across the country have adequate computer and internet access, consider the Fourth Amendment ramifications of having students attend school online via video classes from the privacy of their homes.

Suddenly, you’ve got government officials (in this case, teachers or anyone at the school on the other end of that virtual connection) being allowed carte blanche visual access to the inside of one’s private home without a warrant.

Anything those school officials see—anything they hear—anything they photograph or record—during that virtual visit becomes fair game for scrutiny and investigation not just by school officials but by every interconnected government agency to which that information can be relayed: the police, social services, animal control, the Department of Homeland Security, you name it.

After all, this is the age of overcriminalization, when the federal criminal code is so vast that the average American unknowingly commits about three federal felonies per day, a U.S. Attorney can find a way to charge just about anyone with violating federal law.

It’s a train wreck just waiting to happen.

In fact, we’re already seeing this play out across the country. For instance, a 12-year-old Colorado boy was suspended for flashing a toy gun across his computer screen during an online art class. Without bothering to notify or consult with the boy’s parents, police carried out a welfare check on Isaiah Elliott, who suffers from ADHD and learning disabilities.

An 11-year-old Maryland boy had police descend on his home in search of weapons after school officials spied a BB gun on the boy’s bedroom wall during a Google Meet class on his laptop. School officials reported the sighting to the school resource officer, who then called the police.

And in New York and Massachusetts, growing numbers of parents are being visited by social services after being reported to the state child neglect and abuse hotline, all because their kids failed to sign in for some of their online classes. Charges of neglect, in some instances, can lead to children being removed from their homes.

You see what this is, don’t you?

This is how a seemingly well-meaning program (virtual classrooms) becomes another means by which the government can intrude into our private lives, further normalizing the idea of constant surveillance and desensitizing us to the dangers of an existence in which we are never safe from the all-seeing eyes of Big Brother.

This is how the police sidestep the Fourth Amendment’s requirement for probable cause and a court-issued warrant in order to spy us on in the privacy of our homes: by putting school officials in a position to serve as spies and snitches via online portals and virtual classrooms, and by establishing open virtual doorways into our homes through which the police can enter uninvited and poke around.

Welfare checks. Police searches for weapons. Reports to Social Services.

It’s only a matter of time before the self-righteous Nanny State uses this COVID-19 pandemic as yet another means by which it can dictate every aspect of our lives.

At the moment, it’s America’s young people who are the guinea pigs for the police state’s experiment in virtual authoritarianism. Already, school administrators are wrestling with how to handle student discipline for in-person classes and online learning in the midst of COVID-19.

Mark my words, this will take school zero tolerance policies—and their associated harsh disciplinary penalties—to a whole new level once you have teachers empowered to act as the Thought Police.

As Kalyn Belsha reports for Chalkbeat, “In Jacksonville, Florida, students who don’t wear a mask repeatedly could be removed from school and made to learn online. In some Texas districts, intentionally coughing on someone can be classified as assault. In Memphis, minor misbehaviors could land students in an online ‘supervised study.’”

Depending on the state and the school district, failing to wear a face mask could constitute a dress code violation. In Utah, not wearing a face mask at school constitutes a criminal misdemeanor. In Texas, it’s considered an assault to intentionally spit, sneeze, or cough on someone else. Anyone removing their mask before spitting or coughing could be given a suspension from school.

Virtual learning presents its own challenges with educators warning dire consequences for students who violate school standards for dress code and work spaces, even while “learning” at home. According to Chalkbeat, “In Shelby County, Tennessee, which includes Memphis, that means no pajamas, hats, or hoods on screen, and students’ shirts must have sleeves. (The district is providing ‘flexibility’ on clothing bottoms and footwear when a student’s full body won’t be seen on video.) Other rules might be even tougher to follow: The district is also requiring students’ work stations to be clear of ‘foreign objects’ and says students shouldn’t eat or drink during virtual classes.”

See how quickly the Nanny State a.k.a. Police State takes over?

All it takes for you to cease being the master of your own home is to have a child engaged in virtual learning. Suddenly, the government gets to have a say in how you order your space and when those in your home can eat and drink and what clothes they wear.

If you think the schools won’t overreact in a virtual forum, you should think again.

These are the same schools that have been plagued by a lack of common sense when it comes to enforcing zero tolerance policies for weapons, violence and drugs.

These are the very same schools that have exposed students to a steady diet of draconian zero tolerance policies that criminalize childish behavior, overreaching anti-bullying statutes that criminalize speech, school resource officers (police) tasked with disciplining and/or arresting so-called “disorderly” students, standardized testing that emphasizes rote answers over critical thinking, politically correct mindsets that teach young people to censor themselves and those around them, and extensive biometric and surveillance systems that, coupled with the rest, acclimate young people to a world in which they have no freedom of thought, speech or movement.

Zero tolerance policies that were intended to make schools safer by discouraging the use of actual drugs and weapons by students have turned students into suspects to be treated as criminals by school officials and law enforcement alike, while criminalizing childish behavior.

For instance, 9-year-old Patrick Timoney was sent to the principal’s office and threatened with suspension after school officials discovered that one of his LEGOs was holding a 2-inch toy gun. David Morales, an 8-year-old Rhode Island student, ran afoul of his school’s zero tolerance policies after he wore a hat to school decorated with an American flag and tiny plastic Army figures in honor of American troops. School officials declared the hat out of bounds because the toy soldiers were carrying miniature guns.

A high school sophomore was suspended for violating the school’s no-cell-phone policy after he took a call from his father, a master sergeant in the U.S. Army who was serving in Iraq at the time. In Houston, an 8th grader was suspended for wearing rosary beads to school in memory of her grandmother (the school has a zero tolerance policy against the rosary, which the school insists can be interpreted as a sign of gang involvement).

Even imaginary weapons (hand-drawn pictures of guns, pencils twirled in a “threatening” manner, imaginary bows and arrows, even fingers positioned like guns) can also land a student in detention. Equally outrageous was the case in New Jersey where several kindergartners were suspended from school for three days for playing a make-believe game of “cops and robbers” during recess and using their fingers as guns.

With the distinctions between student offenses erased, and all offenses expellable, we now find ourselves in the midst of what Time magazine described as a “national crackdown on Alka-Seltzer.” Students have actually been suspended from school for possession of the fizzy tablets in violation of zero tolerance drug policies. Students have also been penalized for such inane “crimes” as bringing nail clippers to school, using Listerine or Scope, and carrying fold-out combs that resemble switchblades.

READ THE REST OF THIS ARTICLE……