Whose Blood is on Whose Hands? The Eric Garner Decision Edition!

There has been quite the blame-game in New York following the execution of two Brooklyn police officers, but who is really at fault?

Mayor de Blasio? Sure, there are plenty of reasons to criticize him and his policies, and the city would probably be better off with someone else running it. But as far as the recent shootings were concerned… what could he realistically have done differently? Do you sincerely believe that the killings were caused by de Blasio’s so-called “climate of mistrust?”

Let’s think about it another way: Let’s pretend you are the Mayor of New York, and you have an opportunity to prevent the shootings from happening… except there’s a catch: you won’t have any idea of who, where, or when. All you know is that two cops will die in retaliation for the Garner verdict. So how would you stop the shooting? Make the police stay home? Prohibit protesting? Declare Martial Law? Put the whole city under lockdown? Or would an overreaction risk a far worse outcome? The point is, how could you possibly micro-manage that many moving parts in a city of 8 million people? Can we sincerely blame this all on the Mayor? Even if we really want to?

How about the supposed “black leaders” like Al Sharpton? He certainly plays a role in the overall problem… what else should we expect from a race-hustling, tax-cheating federal snitch and professional agitator? But how much blame can we honestly place on Al for these specific cop killings? Did he tell the man to pull the trigger? Was the shooter even a fan of his? Did he actually watch his never-ending clown-show on MSNBC? Al Sharpton is a national embarrassment and needs to go away, but is he individually responsible for this double-murder? Doubtful.

So should we blame the protesters? After all, some of them did chant hateful things. But did they truly represent the majority of the people that were there? Or were they just a few isolated incidents that were cherry-picked for a purpose? Perhaps even made-up using deceitful editing?

Of course it would be easy to put all the blame the shooter, right? Except it’s an obnoxious oversimplification, and overlooks one obvious problem: the murder wasn’t just some random action, it was an act of retaliation! So if this crime was a matter of cause and effect, what caused the effect?

The Grand Jury Decision of course! Because if the verdict had gone a different way, it’s quite possible that the future could have been completely changed! Imagine: no outrage, no protests, no racial agitators, no political dramas, and most importantly: no dead police!

But did the jury get it right? Of course not! And they didn’t even have to determine guilt, they just had to decide whether the case deserved a second look! But they couldn’t find a good reason for it? Seriously? And no explanation was even necessary? Agree or disagree, at least Bob McCulloch (the Ferguson prosecutor) made a lengthy prime-time statement, and took the time to answer questions! But who was held accountable in New York? Apparently no one… Welcome to Staten Island, what are you gonna do about it?

But what do you think? Did they get the decision right or wrong?

Whether you want to call that resisting arrest or not, the excessive use of force seems severely uncalled for. Especially when it amounted to trivial tax evasion. And was it really necessary for several more officers to pile on top of him on top of it? For peddling piddly loosie puffs? Are you kidding me?

And even though the officer claimed the takedown was a “wrestling move,” it was quite clearly a chokehold. The coroner even ruled his death as a homicide!

Then the initial press conference comes, and the head of the police union (straight out of central casting) blames the victim for “resisting” and “lack of respect” for law enforcement!

Where is the justice? Where is the humanity? There wasn’t any of course; this was all about protecting their own, regardless of the facts and circumstances. Can you believe the balls on this guy? Their head goon (Patrick Lynch) just excused the entire event, blamed the victim, and used it as a warning to the rest of us to keep in line!

With that kind of arrogance on display, is it any wonder why some people feel hostility towards law enforcement? People like Patrick Lynch give the police and unions a bad name. And while it’s unclear how much he personally influenced the unidentifiable Grand Jury’s super-secret decision making process, the results have proven… problematic.

To make a point, let’s imagine that the Eric Garner decision went in a different direction: the prosecutor announces that the case merits a more thorough examination, and outlines the following list of suggestions for the family’s future trial:

  • Conviction of six months for involuntary manslaughter
  • a transfer by the officer to another department
  • another six months of training to earn his badge back
  • a 3 to 5 million dollar settlement for the Garner family
  • a re-evaluation of appropriate use of force for the NYPD
  • a re-evaluation of New York’s tobacco tax laws

Sure, perhaps that list only takes place in a purely hypothetical legal structure, but ask yourself: if that really was the outcome, would there still have been national outrage? Mass protests? A public relations disaster between the mayor and the police union? A pair of unfortunate funerals?

I guess we’ll never know, but the jury didn’t need to make a list! All they had to do was agree that it deserved to have a second opinion! But they didn’t! And look how easy it was for the system to cheat justice! Is it any surprise that people are upset and marching on the streets? Can we even trust these prosecutors to police the police? Or should they be required to recuse themselves? And did you know that Grand Juries have been abolished from virtually every country in the world except for one? Is the Eric Garner decision a good example of why they don’t work?

How are people supposed to respect the rule of law when the system is allowed to act above it? What kind of precedent does that set? Where do we the people draw the line? The Grand Jury didn’t just get it wrong, they proved that the system truly is rigged when they need it to be.

What do we do when the people responsible for justice can clearly commit crimes right in front of us, but can’t be held accountable? And it’s expected to be accepted? Hey, that’s just the way things work… now sit down and shut up!

And for what purpose? Think about how much easier this whole situation could have been if the New York “justice system” could just admit they got this wrong and give a simple apology? Would it have been that big of an issue to put one blue-privileged policeman into a white-collar resort for a few months? And pay the Eric Garner family a few million dollars? While simultaneously saving themselves from the hassle of indefinite protests and bad publicity? And the unintended consequences that led to the deaths of two peace officers?

Apparently not, and that’s why the blood is on their hands. The legal system is a disgrace… now what are they gonna do about it?

Advertisements
Video

American Idol 1965:

Eve of Destruction:

[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IwYNWYaS3bI]

Honestly, when is the last time you heard this on the radio? Do they even make protest music anymore?

All I know is it still rings as true in 2012 as it did went this song went #1 in back in ’65…

Lyrics:

The eastern world it is explodin’, violence flarin’, bullets loadin’

You’re old enough to kill but not for votin’

You don’t believe in war, what’s that gun you’re totin’

And even the Jordan river has bodies floatin’

But you tell me over and over and over again my friend

Ah, you don’t believe we’re on the eve of destruction

Don’t you understand, what I’m trying to say?

Can’t you see the fear that I’m feeling today?

If the button is pushed, there’s no running away

There’ll be none to save with the world in a grave

Take a look around you, boy, it’s bound to scare you, boy

But you tell me over and over and over again my friend

Ah, you don’t believe we’re on the eve of destruction

Yeah, my blood’s so mad, feels like coagulatin’

I’m sittin’ here just contemplatin’

I can’t twist the truth, it knows no regulation

Handful of Senators don’t pass legislation

And marches alone can’t bring integration

When human respect is disintegratin’

This whole crazy world is just too frustratin’

And you tell me over and over and over again my friend

Ah, you don’t believe we’re on the eve of destruction

Think of all the hate there is in Red China

Then take a look around to Selma, Alabama

Ah, you may leave here for four days in space

But when you return it’s the same old place

The poundin’ of the drums, the pride and disgrace

You can bury your dead but don’t leave a trace

Hate your next door neighbor but don’t forget to say grace

And you tell me over and over and over and over again my friend

Ah, you don’t believe we’re on the eve of destruction

The Police State Recognizance Challenge Part IV:

I covered this issue on my radio show today (starting at the 75 minute mark) by reading and covering the latest article from Brandon Smith:

Tuesday, 10 January 2012 05:01 Brandon Smith:

The absurdity of America today never ceases to amaze.  In fact, it has become so elaborate that one might even suggest it has reached a kind of poetic symmetry.  When a protest group is willing to stick their necks out to expose the horror of the National Defense Authorization Act and its open door strategy for unconstitutional arrest and indefinite detainment of American citizens, I have to stand up and applaud.  This is the kind of protest we need to see all over the country.  Of course, any establishment system which is willing to dissolve the inherent liberties of its citizens certainly isn’t going to stand by quietly while they blatantly point out the injustice.  The Grand Central Terminal action featured in the video below is a perfect example of the swift and immediate stifling of peaceful dissent by an increasingly totalitarian government:

Responses to the event vary.  Most people who have actually been exposed to the facts on the NDAA have expressed utter disgust and fury.  Rightly so.  Some, however, have taken the old elitist mantra, perpetuated effectively by the Neo-Cons in their heyday, that if you are not for the system, then you are a danger to society.  Not surprisingly, there are still plenty of useful idiots out there buzzing about like parasites in search of blood.

For those who would applaud these arrests, and suggest that they are well deserved, I would have to ask very pointedly; why?

Is it right to crush free speech as long as the message is offensive to you personally?  Do peaceful protestors really present a legitimate threat to our national stability?  Are they truly more dangerous than a corrupt government hellbent on assassinating the legal protections of our natural rights which have existed for centuries?  Would any supporter of the jackboot methodology like to explain to me in a coherent manner why they believe their skewed world view should be shielded from sincere questions?  Please, I can’t wait to witness the kind of ridiculous mental gymnastics required to make such arguments palatable.  If this kind of ignorance wasn’t so destructive, it might actually be entertaining.

The bottom line is, it doesn’t matter if these activists were in Grand Central Terminal, on the streets, or busting through the doors of the Oval Office.  While New York authorities will attempt to argue property loopholes in free speech protections for Grand Central, or national security because of the vulnerability of the terminal, really, this has nothing to do with either.  This is about the removal of American voices from a room, and nothing more.   If the message is going to be suppressed by the mainstream media, and shrugged off by representatives, then protesters must go to where the people are, and make the truth heard by whatever means necessary.

Ultimately, activism is about disturbing people’s normal mundane routines and shocking them out of their pop-culture stupor, even if for a moment.  If we aren’t allowed to do that without constant police intervention, then the First Amendment is not being served, and then, my friends, we have a problem, a problem which should be forced down the throat of government with even more public action.

You can contact Brandon Smith atbrandon@alt-market.com

Alt-Market is an organization designed to help you find like-minded activists and preppers in your local area so that you can network and construct communities for mutual aid and defense.  Join Alt-Market.com today and learn what it means to step away from the system and build something better.

Here is the followup video of the woman who was arrested, Lauren DiGioia:

Further research:

Police State Recognizance Challenge I:

Police State Recognizance Challenge II:

Police State Recognizance Challenge III:

Are things getting as Orwellian as North Korea?

NDAA for Dummies:

The Police State Recognizance Challenge Part II:

Not too long ago I wrote a post designed to challenge the reader’s critical thinking regarding the recognition of a police state. Specifically, I wrote; “…according to many conspiracy theorists, America has been turning into a worsening police state. They also might argue that it happens so gradually that the average person might not notice. Now if that logic holds true and they are correct, and most roads (potential futures) are leaning toward a police state; at what point would the average person actually recognize it for what it is?”

Well today I’m going to expand on that introduction a little by saying that some researchers believe that it would be more accurate to say that we are actually living in a police state right now! Think about it, would the government actually call itself a police state? Or is it more likely that they would disguise the term under confusing and Orwellian double-speak language instead?

16 reasons why it could be argued that we live under a tyranny right now:

10 indications that the United States is a dictatorship:

4 more years of the Patriot Act even though the vast majority of the public are against it?

Okay, now that you’ve been brought up to speed, it’s now time to show you the latest viral video:

Critical thinking time!

First question: do you have an American bias? Honestly, how much different would this video look to you if it were filmed in another country? Would your perception change? Would you be less surprised?

Second question: since it’s Thomas Jefferson’s memorial; I’m curious, what do you think Thomas Jefferson would say about this event if he could give his opinion?

Third question: Here’s a curve ball, what do you think Martin Luther King would say? Odd question you ask? This video will explain:

Now it’s time to jump across the pond with one of everyone’s favorite activists to show us the latest police state absurdity in Britain:

Way to go Adam and Danny!

Speaking of which; for all of you in the D.C. area, please listen up: In case you missed the latest news (can be found at 1:38 of the MLK video), there will be another peaceful protest at the Thomas Jefferson Memorial this Saturday, June 4th 2011. Stay up to date by clicking this hyperlink leading to Adam’s website:

Bonus police state fun: I hope I’m not showing my age, but before mindless television trash like Jersey Shore existed; I remember a time when there were shows geared towards younger audiences that actually helped make them think and become more intelligent! Seriously!

Remember when I discussed “potential futures,” from my introduction? Well now I can show you an example; does anyone remember the show Sliders?

Here, maybe this will refresh your memory:

Anyway, the point I want to make is how our current reality is ironically starting to resemble one of the negative parallel realities that used to be displayed on the show! In fact, I will show you a rather alarming example: By the way, this show is also available to all of you that have access to instant Netflix as well…

Now to be fair, I realize that this is going to be way too long and a bit “dorky,” for many, so I’m going to make this easy by simply pointing out two quick clips to show you:

20:00-23:00 this is usually the part where I give a synopsis of the scene…
42:50-43:50 but I decided to keep it spoiler free for a change.

One last conspiracy curve ball: Is it possible that this show was part of an experiment known as “predictive programming?”

*Update: Unfortunately, a few concerns have recently been brought to my attention:

First, the video I wanted to link to is on Hulu dot com, so not only can I not post the video here, it’s possible that I might not even be able to link to it. Apparently, since the alternative media has been kicking so much ass lately, the establishment has decided that the only way they can fight back is by introducing tyrannical new laws designed to shut us down. You really have to see this article to believe it:

The other piece of bad news is that I’ve also been informed that Hulu might not be available in many areas outside of the United States, so I apologize to anyone who is unable to access it.

For those that can access the site, go to Hulu dot com and copy and paste the words in the following sentence into their search field in the upper right corner:

sliders time again and world

But no worries, I don’t want to make it seem as though you are missing anything crucial. In fact, here is the plot summary of the episode from Mark D. Snyder of imdb.com; (spoiler alert) “The Sliders land in a world where J. Edgar Hoover founded the nation and martial law has been in effect for 30 years. Chased by government officials, they must make a choice of whether to protect the last surviving copy of the Constitution which could sprout the idea of democracy or gain the release of a former judge who has some potential to be a new founding father.”

Thought provoking?