Top Us Law Schools Present Undeniable Evidence of Israel’s Gaza Genocide

/

From [HERE] On May 15, the University Network for Human Rights (UNHR), a U.S.-based advocacy group training undergraduates in human rights law at colleges and universities worldwide to counter abusive state, corporate, or private conduct, published a 105-page analysis of international law and its application to Israel’s military actions since October 7, 2023. Drawing on extensive evidence and historical legal precedents, the findings leave no doubt that Israel has committed horrific breaches of the 1948 Genocide Convention in Gaza.

A collaborative effort by some of the West’s most prestigious law schools, the report has now been submitted to the United Nations. The institution has yet to comment on the UNHR investigation’s irrefutable, bombshell contents. The mainstream media has also remained silent. Given the complicity of Western journalists in whitewashing and justifying unconscionable crimes in Gaza, this is not surprising. However, the silence has been so pervasive that the report may have even gone unnoticed by committed Palestine solidarity activists.

This silence is itself an injustice, as the UNHR has produced a singular, indispensable resource for factually, legally, and morally refuting the arguments and assertions of Zionists and their allies, old and new. The report details, in devastating forensic detail, the variety of deplorable, murderous ways in which the Israeli state and its operatives at every level are culpable for committing genocide in Gaza, from public expressions of “blatant and unequivocal dehumanization and cruelty” to military actions explicitly designed to maximize Palestinian slaughter.

As defined in the Genocide Convention of 1948 and interpreted by international courts and tribunals, the crime of genocide requires that a perpetrator kill, seriously harm, or inflict conditions of life calculated to destroy a group, in whole or in part, with the intent to destroy that group. Thomas Becker, UNHR’s legal director, tells MintPress News: “What’s happening now is both unprecedented and, in many ways, a textbook case of genocide.”

Five days after the publication of the UNHR’s landmark investigation, International Criminal Court (ICC) prosecutor Karim Khan announced his intent to indict Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Yoav Gallant for numerous crimes against humanity and atrocities committed since October 7, 2023. While it remains uncertain whether they will ever face justice, the Network’s report should inspire governments and citizens worldwide to work relentlessly towards achieving that righteous goal.

‘DESTROY AND EXTERMINATE’

In 1925, German writer and satirist Kurt Tucholsky reportedly remarked, “The death of one man is a catastrophe; a hundred thousand deaths is a statistic.” This quote has since become entrenched in Western political consciousness and is often attributed to various figures, most prominently Soviet leader Joseph Stalin. However, the casualty and death figures emerging from Gaza, especially when accompanied by gruesome photographic and video evidence of Tel Aviv’s numerous crimes, are far from mere statistics.

“Israel’s attack on Palestinians in Gaza has been one of superlatives,” Becker told MintPress News. “More children have died in four months in Gaza than in four years of the world’s conflicts combined. The starvation rate in Gaza is the fastest the world has seen, and this is the deadliest conflict ever recorded for journalists and aid workers,” he continued.

In just half a year, Israel has killed two percent of Gaza’s children and either killed or injured five percent of its total population. It has displaced 75 percent of the population, destroying 70 percent of Gaza’s homes. Additionally, it has destroyed every university and 80 percent of Gaza’s schools.” [MORE]

'Lakers are the Opposite of Celtics:' Will LeMedia Disappear James Worthy for Speaking Reality to Truths Presented on Behalf of Corporation LeBron about Their Puppet Coaches or Frivolous Roster Moves?

/

Losing is not winning and it takes profound denial to believe otherwise. Black people, in particular should really give that some thought and be cognizant of it whenever they are listening to and watching coin-operated probots and rolebots talk about Lebron James in LeMedia. As explained by the rebel Dr. Welsing, Black people are in a state of continuous checkmate (white over Black system) and the annihilation of Black self-respect is worth billions of dollars to elite racists. For what reasons would elites want to promote Black mediocrity? For what reasons do elites promote mediocre Blacks into leadership positions in all areas of people activity (such as labor, politics and law)?

Another way of saying ‘losing is winning’ is, ‘Lebron James is great.’ If you are rationalizing losing as winning using statistics, opinions or other abstractions then you are a plaything in the hands of others. FUNKTIONARY explains ‘When we’re deluded, we don’t know we’re deluded. This is referred to as “Bignorance.”’ According to FUNKTIONARY:

truth laundering – the attempt to make truth reality by successive iterations or modifications along the truth continuum—passing off objective truths for more subjective ones and ultimately attempting to pass off truth as if it were reality or as if wasn’t asymptotic to reality. 2) getting rid of excess truth to avoid paying a reality tax on it. (See: Reality Laundering)

Reality Laundering – concealing immanent reality so it may remain in the realm of transcendental reality—thereby avoiding having to pay a subjective reality tax collected by reality tax collectors. (See: Truth Laundering & Spin Cycle)

Reality 101 – the disturbing and perhaps even astonishing fact that truth and reality are incompatible. For uncounted centuries we’ve wandered Truth’s deserts, wasting life along the way. The causes of our failures and their remedies will never be found where most people waste time arguing. That rules out religious opinion, the making of laws, politics, science, ideologies, science, economics, psychology, traditional education, solciology, or other superficial analyses of human behavior. Oh, they have their contributions (albeit limited), to be sure, but until and unless we go deeper to explore the ideas we have about reality and its attributes, which underlie all arguments, we stumble blindly along. Under all is infinity. The most important fact of existence the world knows nothing of is that reality is a state of infinity, which implies uncertainty, change and imperfection. The secrets of infinity bridge the gulf between what is and what could be. The implications of infinity hold the promises of infinity: Freedom, Creativity and Love. In the promises of infinity are the answers to everything! We must first judge civilization by its consciousness; judge consciousness by its truths; and judge truth by reality. Then, change civilization by changing its consciousness. Change consciousness by changing its truths; and change its truths by changing its understanding of reality. Reality 101 is the realization that reality is infinity and with it the vast implications for a new advanced civilization based in freedom, creativity and love. “There is no greater lie than the truth that refutes Reality.” [MORE]

Trial and Error or Intentional Harm? More Experts Conclude Antibodies Produced by the COVID mRNA Shots were Purposefully Designed to Cause Disease and Unable to Protect Against Infection

/

From [HERE] Per data published by the inventors of the spike protein, the antibodies produced by the COVID-19 mRNA vaccines were purposefully designed to cause disease and unable to protect against infection.

More experts are coming forward verifying that the ‘spike protein’, SARS-2 ‘virus,’ and COVID-19 mRNA injections were designed to be resistant to antibodies and cause disease.

In a February 19, 2020, article in Science, authored by the inventors of coronavirus S-2P spike proteins, Barney Graham and Jason McClellan, the authors state that the S-2P ‘spike protein’ has stronger binding affinity to the ACE-2 receptors (in the hearts, lungs, kidneys, and endothelial cell line of blood vessels) than the original SARS-CoV-2 (S) spike protein.

Graham and McLellan also tested synthetically recreated antibodies for coronaviruses (SARS-CoV-2) against the S-2P spike proteins. Their research showed that none of the antibodies for coronaviruses bound to the new trimeric two-proline spike (S-2P) proteins and no coronavirus antibodies were able to neutralize it. [MORE]

Texas Authorities are Set to Murder a Latino Man Based on the Assessment of Trial Psychiatrist who has Now Changed His Mind About Him Being a “Future Danger”

/

From [HERE] In 2006, Ramiro Gonzales (pictured as a child) confessed to the murder, kidnapping, and rape of Bridget Townsend and was sentenced to death. Texas death sentencing procedures uniquely require capital juries to predict whether a defendant is likely to commit future acts of violence. At Mr. Gonzales’ trial, psychiatrist Dr. Edward Gripon testified for the state and told the jury that Mr. Gonzales “has demonstrated a tendency to want to control, to manipulate, and to take advantage of certain other individuals,” opining that he would cause harm to others in the future. That opinion formed the basis of the jury’s sentence of death. Mr. Gonzales’ execution is now scheduled for June 26, 2024. 

But in September 2021, Dr. Gripon met with Mr. Gonzales on death row and determined his prediction about him was wrong. “Ramiro [Gonzales] doesn’t try to lie his way out… If this man’s sentence was changed to life without parole, I don’t think he’d be a problem,” Dr. Gripon told The Marshall Project. Citing his reliance on a now-debunked study and invalid statistics, Dr. Gripon wrote following this second evaluation that “it is [his] opinion, to a reasonable psychiatric probability, that [Mr. Gonzales] does not pose a threat of future danger to society. According to The Marshall Project, this is the only time Dr. Gripon has ever changed his opinion about a defendant in a death penalty case. 

Mr. Gonzales was scheduled to be executed in July 2022, but two days ahead of his execution date, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals (TCCA) stayed his execution and directed the trial court to review a claim that Dr. Gripon testified and presented false, debunked statistics. Despite Dr. Gripon’s changed opinion, the trial court recommended that the TCCA dismiss Mr. Gonzales’s claim because of procedural bars. [MORE]

Alan Eugene Miller Asks Federal Court to Stop Alabama Authorities From Murdering Him with Nitrogen Gas. Witnesses Described the Previous “Execution” as Horrific, Cruel and Unusual Punishment

/

From [HERE] Alabama inmate Alan Eugene Miller on Friday requested the US District Court for the Middle District of Alabama block his scheduled nitrogen gas execution, which would be the second of its kind in US history.

In 2000, Miller was sentenced to death for the murder of three people. Alabama law lets death row inmates choose the method of death either by lethal injection or by nitrogen gas. In September 2022, Miller requested the nitrogen gas, but Alabama stated they never got the request and therefore determined he would receive lethal injection as the default. Miller lost his suit against the state of Alabama to be executed by nitrogen gas, and he then had his execution rescheduled after his lethal injection did not work.

The first nitrogen gas execution occurred less than six months ago on Kenneth Smith. The procedure did not go as planned, according to Miller’s lawyers. The team called the execution a “disaster” in Friday’s motion, stating, “Multiple eyewitnesses reported a horrific scene, where Mr. Smith writhed on the gurney and foamed at the mouth.” Based on Smith’s reaction to the nitrogen gas execution, Miller’s team argued that his “right to be free from cruel and unusual punishments” under the Eighth Amendment would be violated if Alabama does not execute under the following conditions:

(1) [U]sing a mask that fits Mr. Miller’s larger-than-average face and head, and creates an airtight seal; (2) using a qualified medical or scientific professional, rather than correctional officers, to place the mask on Mr. Miller’s face, and hold it in place if it becomes dislodged in any way; (3) using a qualified medical or scientific professional … to supervise the nitrogen flow rate during the execution; (4) having a medical professional present in the execution chamber during the execution attempt, who can respond if the execution goes awry as Mr. Smith’s did; (5) using medical grade nitrogen; and (6) using a sedative or tranquilizing medication in pill form before administering the nitrogen gas …

The motion therefore sought to block Miller’s execution until the state decides to follow those conditions by preliminary injunction.

Miller’s preliminary injunction can be granted only if Miller will “suffer irreparable harm” without it and if it will not “substantially harm” Alabama or harm the “public interest.” His team argued that the pain suffered from the execution would be irreparable and the “minimal delay” caused by the injunction would be an unsubstantial harm for Alabama. The motion also added that the public has an interest in ensuring that constitutional rights are not violated.

The nitrogen gas method of execution has been widely criticized by the UN and Amnesty International for being experimental and inherently cruel.

Supreme Ct says Law Used to Charge Jan 6th Protestors Only Criminalizes the Destruction of Evidence and Is Not Applicable to Obstructing Events or Attempt ‘Honkey Kong Unlawful Entry Revolutions'

/

From [HERE] In a closely watched decision stemming from the January 6, 2021, Capitol riot, the US Supreme Court ruled on Friday that the government must prove a defendant impaired or attempted to impair the availability or integrity of evidence to be convicted under a key obstruction statute. The statute has nothing to do with obstructing an event at the capitol.

On January 6, 2021, a crowd of supporters of then-President Donald Trump gathered outside the US Capitol while Congress convened in a joint session to certify the 2020 Presidential election results in favor of Joe Biden. Amid escalating tensions, some protesters breached the Capitol, breaking windows and clashing with law enforcement, which resulted in a significant delay in the certification process.

The complaint alleges that Fischer was one of those who invaded the building.

According to the complaint, about an hour after the Houses recessed, Fischer trespassed into the Capitol and was involved in a physical confrontation with law enforcement. Fischer claimed in Facebook posts that he “pushed police back about 25 feet,” and that he “was inside the [Cap- itol] talking to police.” Id., at 193–194. Body camera foot- age shows Fischer near a scrum between the crowd and police who were trying to eject trespassers from the building.

A grand jury returned a seven-count superseding indict- ment against Fischer. Six of those counts allege that Fischer forcibly assaulted a federal officer, entered and re- mained in a restricted building, and engaged in disorderly and disruptive conduct in the Capitol, among other crimes. See id., at 181–185; 18 U. S. C. §§111(a), 231(a)(3), 1752(a)(1), (a)(2); 40 U. S. C. §§5104(e)(2)(D), (G). Those six counts carry maximum penalties ranging from six months’ to eight years’ imprisonment.

In Count Three, the only count before the court, the Government charged Fischer with violating 18 U. S. C. §1512(c)(2). Fischer moved to dismiss that count, arguing that the provision criminalizes only attempts to impair the availability or integrity of evidence. The District Court granted his motion in relevant part. It concluded that the scope of Section 1512(c)(2) is limited by subsection (c)(1) and therefore requires the defendant to “‘have taken some action with respect to a document, record, or other object.’

A divided panel of the D. C. Circuit reversed and re- manded for further proceedings. Judge Pan, writing for the court, held that the word “otherwise” in Section 1512(c)(2) means that the provision unambiguously covers “all forms of corrupt obstruction of an official proceeding, other than the conduct that is already covered by §1512(c)(1).” 64 F. 4th 329, 336 (2023). Judge Walker concurred in part and concurred in the judgment because he read the mens rea element of the statute—“corruptly”—as requiring a defend- ant to act with “an intent to procure an unlawful benefit.” Id., at 361 (internal quotation marks omitted). The preceding section of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, 1512(c)(1) establishes criminal liability for specific actions such as altering, destroying, or concealing records intending to obstruct official proceedings. Subsection 1512(c)(2) broadens this prohibition to anyone who “otherwise obstructs, influences, or impedes any official proceeding, or attempts to do so.”The Supreme Court was asked to weigh in on whether the expansive language of 1512(c)(2) should be tempered by the specific acts listed in 1512(c)(2).

Through statutory interpretation of the language of the statute and its legislative history and context, the Court ruled that 1512(c)(2)n had nothing to do with obstructing an official proceeding. Rather, 1512(c)(2) “was enacted simply to address the Enron accounting scandal disaster which dealt with the destruction of documents and other forms of evidence. [MORE]

New Study Debunks Propaganda: Concealed Carry Laws Don’t Increase Crime, Say Experts

/

From [HERE] The debate over concealed carry weapon (CCW) laws is as heated as ever. With out-of-control crime and a flood of illegal alien criminals, citizen concealed carry is needed now more than ever, as recent self-defense events illustrate. Well-funded Gun control advocates tirelessly argue that these laws lead to more crime, but a new research paper “How Does Concealed Carrying of Weapons Affect Violent Crime?” by John R. Lott and Carlisle E. Moody is making waves by challenging these claims head-on. Here’s what you need to know about their findings, especially if you support gun rights.

The Claims: More Concealed Carry Holders, More Crime?

Anti-gun activists often say that right-to-carry laws, which allow citizens to carry concealed firearms, lead to two main problems:

  1. More Stolen Guns: They argue that more people carrying permitted guns means more chances for those guns to be stolen and end up in the hands of criminals.

  2. Interference with Police: They claim that armed citizens make it harder for police to do their jobs, reducing their effectiveness and potentially increasing crime.

The Research: Setting the Record Straight

Lott and Moody set out to test these claims using solid data. Their research doesn’t just lump all CCW laws together. Instead, they look at specific factors, like the percentage of the adult population with a permit and the number of stolen guns in each state. Here’s what they found:

  1. Stolen Guns: Using data Lott and Moody obtained with help from Congressman Thomas Massie, the study shows that CCW permit holders are NOT a significant source of stolen guns. The research found that the coefficients on CCW permits per capita were approximately ZERO, meaning there was no significant relationship between the number of permits and the number of stolen guns. This slam closed the argument that more CCW permits equal more guns for criminals.

  2. Police Effectiveness: The study also found NO evidence that CCW permit holders reduce police effectiveness. The clearance rates (arrest rates) for violent crimes, such as murder, rape, robbery, and assault, showed no significant difference related to the number of CCW permits. In fact, many law enforcement officers believe that armed citizens can help reduce crime. This directly counters the claim that more people carrying guns make it harder for the police to do their jobs.

Supporting Data

  • Revocation Rates: In the 19 states with comprehensive data, the average revocation rate of CCW permits for any reason is one-tenth of 1%. This indicates that permit holders are highly law-abiding.

  • Driving Violations: Data from Michigan shows that non-permit holders are 2.4 times more likely to drive drunk, 34.1 times more likely to drive under the influence of a controlled substance, and 10.6 times more likely to drive recklessly compared to permit holders.

  • Police Opinion: A 2013 survey by PoliceOne found that 76% of law enforcement officers believe legally armed citizens are very or extremely important in reducing crime. Additionally, 91.3% support civilians carrying firearms if they haven’t been convicted of a felony or deemed psychologically incapable.

Why This Matters

For gun rights supporters, this research is a big deal. It provides strong evidence that right-to-carry laws don’t lead to the negative outcomes that anti-gun activists claim. Instead, it supports the idea that law-abiding citizens carrying firearms can coexist with effective policing without increasing crime rates. [MORE]

To Make the Uvalde False Flag More Real, Govt Indicts Police Chief Over Response to "School Massacre" [under the "the public duty doctrine" Cops Have No Legal Duty to Protect Any Particular Citizen]

/

THERE WILL PROBABLY BE NO CONTESTED TRIAL. JUST A GUILTY PLEA. According to the Supreme Court police have no legal duty to protect any victim from violence by other private parties unless the victim was in police custody. [MORE] and [MORE] This means that police cannot be sued for any federal constitutional claim for a failure to protect citizens. Unless a state negligence law exists allowing such a lawsuit, victims cannot hold police liable for a failure to protect from harm from private parties. [MORE]

 From [HERE] The former Uvalde schools police chief was indicted over his role in the slow police response to the 2022 massacre at a Texas elementary school that left 19 children and two teachers dead, the local sheriff said Thursday.

Pete Arredondo was indicted by a grand jury on 10 counts of felony child endangerment/abandonment and briefly booked into the county jail before he was released on bond, Uvalde Sheriff Ruben Nolasco told The Associated Press in a text message Thursday night.

The Uvalde Leader-News and the San Antonio Express-News reported that former school officer Adrian Gonzales also was indicted on multiple similar charges. The Uvalde Leader-News reported that District Attorney Christina Mitchell confirmed the indictment.

The indictments make Arredondo, who was the on-site commander during the attack, and Gonzales the first officers to face criminal charges in one of the deadliest school shootings in U.S. history. A scathing report by Texas lawmakers that examined the police response described Gonzales as one of the first officers to enter the building after the shooting began.

Arredondo lost his job three months after the shooting. Several officers involved were eventually fired, and separate investigations by the Department of Justice and state lawmakers faulted law enforcement with botching their response to the massacre.

Whether any officers would face criminal charges over their actions in Uvalde has been a question hanging over the city of 15,000 since the Texas Rangers completed their investigation and turned their findings over to prosecutors.

Mitchell’s office has also come under scrutiny. Uvalde city officials filed a lawsuit in 2022 that accused prosecutors of not being transparent and withholding records related to the shooting. Media outlets, including the AP, also sued Uvalde officials for withholding records requested under public information laws.

But body camera footage, investigations by journalists and damning government reports have laid bare how over the course of over an hour, a mass of officers went in and out of the school with weapons drawn but did not go inside the classroom where the shooting was taking place. The hundreds of officers at the scene included state police, Uvalde police, school officers and U.S. Border Patrol agents. [MORE]

7 Barbaric Israeli Race Soldiers Charged for Severely Beating a Palestinian Man and Then Branding His Face with the Star of David. Will the Super Fair IsrAlien Courts Provide Justice?

/

From [HERE] The Department for Internal Police Investigations says that it has notified 7 police officers that they will be charged in a 2023 incident of alleged police brutality against an East Jerusalem resident.

According to a statement from DIPI, the seven cops are slated to be indicted on varying charges of abuse of a helpless person; aggravated assault; obstruction of investigative proceedings; and abuse of official power.

In the August 2023 incident, East Jerusalem Palestinian Arwah Sheikh Ali says that police officers beat him and branded his face with a Star of David while arresting him for suspected drug trafficking. The officers were also accused of deleting footage of the arrest.

Vadim Shub, head of the Jerusalem public defender’s office, which is representing Mr. Sheikh Ali, said in an interview on Sunday, “The mark on his face is the tip of the iceberg,” adding, “We want to raise the issue of police violence.”

Mr. Shub said the mark was still evident four days after Mr. Sheikh Ali’s arrest.

“When his lawyer visited him, he saw that he was heavily beaten, and he saw a sign that looks like a Star of David,” Mr. Shub said.

Mr. Shub said that 16 officers had been present during Mr. Sheikh Ali’s arrest but that there was no body-camera footage. The police did not answer questions about the lack of recordings. [MORE]

Judge Denies Immunity b/c Randolph County Cops Should Have Known It was Unlawful to Violently Bust Out Black Woman’s Driver Side Window and Yank Her Through the Broken Glass By Her Hair

/

From [HERE] The 4th US Circuit Court of Appeals will allow a woman to proceed with her federal excessive-force lawsuit against three Randolph County sheriff’s deputies. Appellate judges ruled Thursday against granting the deputies immunity from the suit.

The court’s opinion noted the “obvious illegality” of the “outrageous conduct” alleged in the suit.

Ka’Lah Martin’s complaint stemmed from a February 2019 traffic stop “that turned violent and culminated in her arrest,” wrote Judge Robert Bruce King for the unanimous 4th Circuit panel.

Martin was driving a $600 car that “had some issues,” in King’s words. She could open neither the front doors nor windows. When a Randolph County sheriff’s deputy attempted to stop Martin for failing to display a registration plate, she slowed her speed from 65 miles per hour to 30  mph and turned on her hazard lights. Martin drove for nearly six miles before turning off the road.

When she did pull over, there were multiple deputies, who approached with guns drawn. Martin had her hands raised and tried to tell the deputies that her car's front doors and windows did not work, but they smashed her driver's side window, grabbed her by the hair and arms, pulled her out without removing her seat belt, and threw her on the asphalt,

Martin received no medical attention to the cuts and scrapes resulting from being pulled through the broken window until she was released from jail and went to a doctor herself. [MORE]

She was arrested and charged with fleeing to elude arrest, operating a vehicle with no insurance and driving without a license plate. The charges later were dismissed. [MORE]

Martin filed suit in November 2021. Among her claims were excessive-force violations by deputies Travis Short, Kyle Gabby, and Jeremiah Harrelson. Each deputy claimed qualified immunity. The trial court rejected that defense and ruled that the excessive-force claims should proceed to trial.

“[W]e underscore that the appellants present the district court’s factual recitation in a way that actually favors them over plaintiff Martin in several respects,” King wrote. “For example, the appellants would have us rule that their use of force was reasonable based on the evidence that Martin continued to drive for 5.7 miles after appellant Short initiated his patrol car’s emergency lights and that Martin needed no more than a band-aid, Ibuprofen, and muscle relaxers for injuries sustained during her arrest.”

“Concomitantly, the appellants would have us diminish and outright disregard evidence tending to refute any threat that otherwise might be inferred from Martin’s continued driving (such as the evidence that Martin slowed her vehicle significantly and turned on the vehicle’s hazard lights), as well as evidence suggesting that any lack of more serious injuries was simply a matter of luck (i.e., the evidence that the appellants busted out the driver’s side window, forcibly pulled Martin through the broken window by her hair and arm, and then placed her face down on the roadway),” King added.

“At bottom, when we view the facts in the light that is truly most favorable to plaintiff Martin, we cannot conclude either that the appellants did not contravene her Fourth Amendment right against an unreasonable seizure or that the right was not clearly established at the time of her arrest,” King concluded.

 “Indeed, we are convinced that — when, as Martin alleges happened, the appellants violently busted out the windows of her vehicle and yanked her through the broken driver’s side window by her hair and arm — every reasonable officer would have understood that what he was doing was unlawful, whether by then-existing precedent or by the otherwise obvious illegality of that outrageous conduct,” King wrote.

Chief Judge Albert Diaz and Judge Harvie Wilkinson joined King’s opinion.

Election Psyopsy: Only 1 Person is Actually Running for President but Dumbocrats in a State of 'Mazement' Believe Otherwise Despite Evidence to the Contrary [there are Only False Choices in the FRP]

/

How do you persuade a populace to embrace totalitarianism, that goose-stepping form of tyranny in which the government has all of the power and “we the people” have none?

According to FUNKTIONARY:

psyopsy – performing an analysis of what caused one who is mentally dead and culturally comatose to reach such a state or fate. Psyopsies can be performed only on the living dead. Those who are living another’s script (“reality”) are candidates.

Hobson’s Choice – you can either get with this or nothing at all. (See: Volition, Deschooling & Free Will)

maze – a fortified network of oversimplified logics and programmed attachments with strong emotional charges (connected to the attachments) severely hampering one in achieving lasting satisfaction from Life and clarification in Life. In a state of a ‘mazement’ learning is suspended and experiences which need to be assimilated are repressed. The cheddar-chasers say: “Don’t bother me, I know what I have to do to get what I want.” You would be amazed to learn how simple (not easy) it is to escape the smoke alarm reaction filled haze of the mighty maze. 2) a system of interconnecting multicursal pathways replete with blind alleys, twists and turns, false choices and unknown exit points often designed to confuse or confound the traveler. Mazes can be used to spiral through the rungs of our evolution in consciousness both infinitely extendable and expandable. (See: Cementality, Meditativeness, BLYND, Generalizations, Absolute Truth, Psylence, Critical Thought, Me-Bot, Understanding, Logic, Identifications, Mindful Witnessing, Souljourn, Consciousness, Clarity & Neuralasticity)

delusion – perceiving our personal experience as the ultimate reality. The delusion is not in the experience, but our existential orientation to it within our mind. There is no absolute way or fixed method to dismantle or dissipate your delusions, for they are myriad and legion when the primary delusion is running your spiritual operating system, i.e., the delusion of duality. However, there are a few approaches that address the Catch-22 of delusion. Aptly noted in the Quran surah 3:185 “…And what is the life of this world except the enjoyment of delusion.” All other delusions stem from this master delusion—the Template of Duality. “When one person suffers from delusion, it’s called insanity. When many people suffer from delusion, it is called religion.” ~Robert Pirsig. Delusion, by its very nature, is quite obscure. When we’re deluded, we don’t know we’re deluded. This is what I refer to as “Bignorance.” Those unaware are unaware of being unaware. Even delusion itself exists already within the freedom of the Self. (See: Ghosts, The Self, The Sky, Illusion, Physical World, “Me,” Ego, Appropriate Attention, The World, “Bignorance,” Mastar, Religion, HOE, Beacon, The World, Template of Duality, SOS, Separate Self, Suffering, Identification, Authority, Perception, Explanation, Impressions, Identities, Attachment, Fear, Thinking, Religion, Reductionism & Passing Show)

Jury says Washington Cop Murdered Unarmed Homeless Cambodian Man. Though He Faced No Threat, White Cop Shot Jesse Sarey, Then Reloaded and Shot Him Again in the Head While He was Lying on the Pavement

/

From [HERE] and [HERE] A jury found a suburban Seattle police officer guilty of murder Thursday in the 2019 shooting death of a homeless man outside a convenience store, marking the first conviction under a Washington state law easing prosecution of law enforcement officers for on-duty killings.

After deliberating for three days, the jury found Auburn Police Officer Jeffrey Nelson guilty of second-degree murder and first-degree assault for shooting Jesse Sarey twice while trying to arrest him for disorderly conduct. Deliberations had been halted for several hours Wednesday after the jury sent the judge an incomplete verdict form Tuesday saying they were unable to reach an agreement on one of the charges.

The judge revealed Thursday that the verdict the jury was struggling with earlier in the week was the murder charge. They had already reached agreement on the assault charge.

Nelson was ordered into custody after the hearing. He’s been on paid administrative leave since the shooting in 2019. The judge set sentencing for July 16. Nelson faces up to life in prison on the murder charge and up to 25 years for first-degree assault. His lawyer said she plans to file a motion for a new trial.

In 2019, Sarey was reportedly having a crisis and was allegedly throwing garbage, banging on store windows and kicking cars in an Auburn shopping area. Nelson claimed Sarey failed to comply with arrest, so he began punching Sarey numerous times in the head and upper body. Nelson then drew his gun and shot Sarey in the torso.

After Sarey fell onto the pavement, Nelson tried to fire his gun again before it jammed. The video then shows Nelson clearing the round, racking another bullet and firing a second shot into Sarey’s head.

The jurors rejected Nelson claim that Sarey tried to grab his gun and a knife, so he shot him in self-defense. In fact, video showed Sarey was on the ground reclining away from Nelson after the first shot.

A witness, Steven Woodard, testified that after the first shot, “Mr. Sarey was ‘done,’ lying on the ground in a nonthreatening position.”

Sarey’s family told The Associated Press (AP) he was the son of survivors of the Khmer Rouge genocide in Cambodia and became homeless after aging out of foster care.

“Jesse Sarey died because this defendant chose to disregard his training at every step of the way,” King County Special Prosecutor Patty Eakes told the jury in her closing argument Thursday. The shooting was “unnecessary, unreasonable and unjustified,” she said.

The case is the first of its kind in Washington as Nelson was the first police officer in King County to face murder charges and his case was also the first to be prosecuted under I-940, a police accountability measure passed in 2018.

The King County Prosecuting Attorney’s office thanked the jury for their efforts on the case, which has gone on for more than three weeks.

“We appreciate the hard work of all parties to get to these important verdicts,” spokesman Casey McNerthney said in an email. “All along we felt this was a case that needed to be tried before a jury. Our thoughts continue to be with Mr. Sarey’s loved ones.”

The case was the second to go to trial since Washington voters in 2018 removed a standard that required prosecutors to prove an officer acted with malice — a standard no other state had. Now they must show the level of force was unreasonable or unnecessary. In December, jurors acquitted three Tacoma police officers in the 2020 death of Manuel Ellis.

Auburn settled a civil rights claim by Sarey’s family for $4 million and has paid nearly $2 million more to settle other litigation over Nelson’s actions as a police officer.

KILLER COP KILLED 3 OTHER PEOPLE. Sarey was the third person Nelson has killed in his law enforcement career. Jurors did not hear evidence about Nelson’s prior uses of deadly force.

Prior to fatally shooting Sarey, Nelson killed Isaiah Obet in 2017. Obet was acting erratically, and Nelson ordered his police dog to attack. He then shot Obet in the torso. Obet fell to the ground, and Nelson fired again, fatally shooting Obet in the head. Police said the officer’s life was in danger because Obet was high on drugs and had a knife. The city reached a settlement of $1.25 million with Obet’s family.

In 2011, Nelson fatally shot Brian Scaman, a Vietnam War veteran with mental issues and a history of felonies, after pulling Scaman’s vehicle over for a burned-out headlight. Scaman got out of his car with a knife and refused to drop it; Nelson shot him in the head. An inquest jury cleared Nelson of wrongdoing.