When I was a boy, I learned from my father that one does not go where they are not wanted unless they are looking for a fight.
I find this concept to be a simple one, yet it is not comprehended by far too many individuals in this world because I see these fools trespassing into spaces where they have no right to be, are not needed there, are not wanted there, and then complain that they are treated like criminals for doing so.
Space is property. This includes social space. It is a thing that one creates through the admixture of one's labor with the raw material of Nature, changing it from what naturally emerges into something crafted and defined by the hands of Man and guided by the mind of Man. That it lacks a form obvious to one's eyes at times does not mean that the creation does not exist, that it is not a thing created by one or more individuals, and thus space is property.
Therefore, no one has the right to unilaterally cross into space that is neither their own property nor that which is the common property of all without the permission of the owner. To do so is to violate that property, to do damage or steal something that does not belong to you, and that is an act of violence. It is predatory behavior, and it is NOT to be tolerated.
There are places in this world where, for whatever reason, you are not to go. You do not have a right to be wherever you want to go; boundaries do exist, and with good reason, and one of the first steps to a practical and lasting peace is the insistence that these boundaries be respected- and that does me using whatever force is required to do the work necessary to finish the job that is defending these fundamental Natural Law rights. I weep not for the trespassers slain by those defending their property, and neither does any other right-thinking individual, because no one sheds a tear for those seeking to prey upon others.
As I said above, this includes social spaces. You don't have a right to be in a social space just because it is there, no matter how alluring that space is. If you are told to keep out, then know that you have no right of ownership. You are not wanted there. You are not needed there. Respect their right to their property, and go somewhere else. (And, by correlation, if you are allowed within, then you are a guest and you are expected to behave appropriately.) If you want to gain admission, then either take out an ownership stake or become an owner's guest, and take both the obligations as well as the benefits of that course of action. (Guests may be expelled at any time, and ownership demands engagement with that property.)
Space is not scarce. It is abundant, especially in the social realm. There is no reason to violate the space of others to achieve the ends that you desire from occupying that space; this is predatory behavior and cannot be tolerated. Go elsewhere and do the work necessary to create a space that is truly your own; violating the space of others is the path of destruction, chaos, and ruin- it turns everything it touches to shit. Building your own space, creating your own property, is the path of civilization, order, prosperity, and the betterment of Mankind as a whole. It takes time, and there is no guarantee of success, but even failure is productive and useful- if you are willing and able to listen to the lessons that it offers.
The violation of another's space, regardless of the excuse, is to show that you are infected by Empire; you make the false presumption that you can claim that which you neither created nor traded for, under some sophistry that comes down to "I am your master, and you shall obey because reasons or I shall violate your body or your property until I compel compliance from you." This is Empire. If you think yourself better than this, then prove it- and repent from such behavior forevermore. The more that we do this, the sooner Empire must fall.
Showing posts with label non-aggression principle. Show all posts
Showing posts with label non-aggression principle. Show all posts
Sunday, August 31, 2014
Sunday, August 17, 2014
"Authority" is a Cult. Resisting is Doing Good.
Given the events going on in Ferguson, Missouri I find this article at the Free Thought Project to be one that needs a much wider reading. Usually, I would just link to it and give my commentary below. Today, I will reproduce it in its entirety (link to the original is above) and then give my commentary, and that will come with a Larken Rose video that speaks blasphemy against Empire's false faith, the Cult of the Thin Blue Line. WARNING: This is going to be a long post.
* * * * *
No, The Police Don’t Work for You
By Matt Agorist on July 21st, 2014.
Law enforcement is a “product” we are forced to buy
“The police are worthless. I don’t know what we’re paying them for.” Pro Libertate
William N. Grigg
July 21, 2014
That familiar, despairing lament was voiced by a friend here in Payette after his family had lost $20,000 worth of property a burglary. The crime was solved before the police intervened: Some of the pilfered property was still in possession of the suspects, who admitted that it didn’t belong to them. Working on their own initiative, my friend and his adult daughter — the primary victim — tracked down more of the stolen goods at local yard sales and garage sales.
A phone call to the Payette PD led to a visit by an officer who was courteous, professional, and who provided no practical help of any kind. He did arrest one suspect, a mentally deficient man who readily admitted to the officer that he had taken the property because an unspecified “they” had told him it was “all right” to do so.
Neither the responding officer, nor the colleague who took over the case when the first officer went on vacation, expended any effort to identify who “they” were, or to press charges against the accomplices. The case was closed with the arrest of a solitary man — a registered sex offender — who “became somewhat upset [because] he was the only one who was going to be in trouble for the thefts that occurred, because he was honest,” as an investigative report summarized.
“The police wouldn’t bother to fingerprint my stolen property,” Elizabeth Puckett, the owner of the property, recounted to me. “When I asked why, the officer said, `Well, we’re not CSI.’” It shouldn’t be assumed that the Payette PD is consistently insouciant about the collection of forensic evidence. A few years ago, Puckett recalls, she received a visit from the Animal Control officer (an official with whom I’ve had some experience) after the department received a report that “we had a dog that looked like a pit bull.”
A county ordinance enacted several years ago during a spasm of civic alarm forbids residents to “own, possess, keep, exercise control over, maintain, harbor, transport, buy or sell” pit bulls or “dangerous dogs” displaying pit bull characteristics. Those who owned such dogs prior to enactment of the ban were required to register them with the police (who were exempt from the ordinance, of course), “keep $1 million liability insurance, have a microchip ID … implanted in the dog, and pay an annual pit bull license fee.” Dogs owned by people not in compliance with the edict “are subject to impoundment and destruction.”
“The officer told us that if we were going to keep it we would have to have a blood test,” Elizabeth recalled. “So I would have had to pay $100 for a blood test, and still could lose the dog if it displayed the wrong `characteristics.’ So I just let the dog go.”
The same Payette Police Department that couldn’t help Elizabeth recover her stolen property was diligent in taking her property, even though she had done no injury to anybody else. This is because the Payette PD, like every other agency of its kind, is involved in law enforcement, rather than the protection of persons and property. It defines its role in terms of what its officers can do to people, rather than what they are required to do for people.
No, Police Don’t Work for You
When a disgusted citizen tells an abusive police officer that he pays the officer’s salary, the victim is committing a category error. Those of us who constitute the productive sector don’t pay the police; they are paid by the people who plunder our property at gunpoint. Once it is understood that police employed by the people who commit aggression against our property, we shouldn’t be surprised that police are of practically no value in terms of protecting property against criminal aggression. Police are properly seen as retail-level distributors of violence on behalf of the coercion cartel.
Law enforcement is a “product” we are forced to buy, and severely punished — through summary application of torture, or even by death — if we refuse. Since law enforcement operates as a monopoly, rather than through the market, there is no legitimate pricing mechanism to guide rational allocation of resources, and no way to measure “customer” satisfaction — although using the term “customer” in this context is a bit like using the term “girlfriend” to describe a rape victim.
Indeed, the institutional response of law enforcement to public dissatisfaction is to expand and escalate the behavior that inspired the discontent, and treat persistent criticism as evidence of criminal intent. Witness recent developments in Albuquerque, where outrage over serial police homicides — including the death squad-style murder last March of James Boyd, an unarmed homeless man — generated a substantial organized protest movement.
After infuriated protesters took control of a city council meeting to place the defiant APD Chief Gorden Eden “on trial,” the city government’s reaction was not to cashier the official who had instigated the outrage, but rather to impose new restrictions on citizen participation in city council meetings.
When protesters held a subsequent public “mock trial” of Chief Eden at a peaceful public demonstration, the gathering was infiltrated by a several undercover police officers, including a detective who had shot a 20-year-old in the stomach during a drug sting in 2010. As public frustration and discontent continue to rise in Albuquerque, the APD has responded to the growing dissatisfaction of its “clientele” by spending $350,000 to purchase 350 AR-15 rifles – the same type that were used to slaughter Boyd in the foothills outside the city just a few weeks earlier.
The Albuquerque Police Department, like dozens of others nation-wide, has displayed what the Justice Department calls a “pattern and practice” of excessive force. If it were a private corporation, it would be the target of lawsuits and, most likely, criminal prosecution. Unlike a private entity, however, a police department is protected by the fiction of “sovereign immunity,” and its employees are shielded from personal accountability through “qualified immunity.”
While exceptionally corrupt police departments are occasionally disbanded, their “markets” are quickly captured by other agencies that will provide the same “service.” Individual police officers who distinguish themselves through abusive and criminal behavior — which, given the competition, is a significant accomplishment — sometimes find themselves briefly unemployed. However, they often become “gypsy cops” and find employment elsewhere as state-licensed purveyors of violence.
“Operational Security” rather than Accountability
One fact not adequately understood by the public is that even geographically local police departments are not locally accountable. Police chiefs are not elected officials; they are appointed by the municipal corporation that employs them. Police departments describe themselves as public agencies for the purpose of “qualified immunity.” However, as the recent ACLU report on police militarization revealed, an increasing number of police agencies are claiming to be “private corporations” exempt from open records laws.
This isn’t the only tactic employed by police agencies to impede transparency and accountability to the public supposedly “served” by them.
I recently filed a public records request with the Malheur County Sheriff’s Office regarding the disposal of a huge quantity of marijuana that had been seized by a nearby multi-jurisdictional narcotics task force. Undersheriff Travis Johnson informed me that he could provide “photo documentation” of the marijuana being buried at a local landfill. “The cost to produce those records will be one hour of labor at $48.11 and one CD at $10 for a total of $58.11,” according to Johnson.
Both the “labor” and materials involved in fulfilling that records request have already been paid for. The information — which, interestingly, was not provided to the defense as discovery during a recently-concluded trial — should be easy to find. All that is necessary would be for a MCSO functionary to insert a CD into a computer and click a mouse. A single CD — assuming that Malheur County buys them in bulk – would cost less than twenty cents. The market rate foran hour of labor by a “copy specialist” is less than nine dollars. The amount cited to me by Undersheriff Johnson reflects the price structure of a monopoly, which in this case is trying to impede public scrutiny of its actions by making it cost-prohibitive to pursue public records requests.
Opacity of this kind is hardly compatible with a “public service” agency. It is entirely appropriate, however, for an entity that sees the public as hostile and thus makes “operational security” a priority.
Even before “local” police agencies were effectively satellitized by the federal government they were paramilitary bodies designed to operate as occupation forces, rather than as a protective service. In creating his London Metropolitan Police, Robert Peel adapted the model he had employed in creating the “Peace Preservation Force,” a specialized unit within the 20,000-man military contingent Peel had commanded as military governor of occupied Ireland.
Peel’s Militaristic Model
Writing in the December 1961 Journal of Modern History, Galen Broekker observed that when Peel was appointed governor in 1814, his objective in creating the Peace Preservation Force was “`pacifying’ a recalcitrant population.” For several years prior to Peel’s appointment, rural insurgents called “banditti” had been fighting among themselves and occasionally attacking British outposts. Of much greater concern to occupation authorities, however, was evidence of involvement by “respectable people” in “insurrectionary activity of a political nature.”
At the time of Peel’s arrival, the crime rate in Ireland wasn’t particularly high, so he took advantage of a “lull” to “muster the forces of authority in anticipation of the inevitable trouble to come” as English authorities took aggressive action to stamp out separatism. The “Peace Preservation Force” — which was the prototype for every modern police agency — wasn’t designed to protect person and property from criminal aggression, but rather to protect a political elite. This is why Peel’s London Metropolitan Police Force was initially greeted with hostility by conservatives in the British Parliament and the public at large, who often referred to officers as “Blue Locusts.” Within a decade, however, Peel’s model was firmly entrenched in London, and migrated across the Atlantic to New York City.
As evangelists of “Manifest Destiny” carved their bloody path to the Pacific, an Americanized version of Peel’s police concept was among the chief tenets of their gospel of government-imposed “civilization.” It wasn’t until the early 1970s, however, that the latent militarism of the police was given expression when the Nixon administration declared “war” on drugs. This led to the proliferation of SWAT teams, which were modelled after counter-insurgency units organized by the CIA as part of its Phoenix Program in Vietnam.
Declining Crime, Escalating Police Militarism
Beginning in the 1970s, the official rhetoric of law enforcement became overtly martial, a tendency that has grown in crescendo. However, by most measures, violent crime has been in decline for five decades. A similar trend is visible regarding on-the-job police fatalities. Joseph McNamara, former NYPD Deputy Inspector, points out that police “work” is actually much safer today than it has been in a half-century or more. Law enforcement is not found in the top ten “most dangerous occupations” in the annual list compiled by the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
Yet police insist that the United States “has become a war zone,” in the words of Sheriff Michael Gayer of Indiana’s Pulaski County. This is entirely true — but only in the sense that the police consider themselves at war with the public, and have fully embraced a mindset compatible with their role as an occupying army.
As was the case when Peel created his “Peace Preservation Force” in Ireland two centuries ago, the Power Elite has been relentlessly expanding its domestic army of occupation and indoctrinating those enlisted therein to see the public as its enemy — ”in anticipation of the inevitable trouble to come.”
Just a few weeks ago, the House of Representatives recently rejected, by a dramatic margin, an amendment to a military spending bill proposed by Florida Democratic Representative Alan Grayson that would have placed theoretical limits on the transfer of war-fighting assets to local police departments. Mind you, that measure would not have shut down the Pentagon’s pipeline to the police; it would have forbidden future transfers of high-capacity weaponry, including armed drones, armored vehicles, grenade launchers, “toxicological agents,… guided missiles, ballistic missiles, rockets, torpedoes, bombs, mines, or nuclear weapons.”
The amendment was rejected by a vote of 355 to 62 — which means that 355 members of the House of Representatives, the branch of the federal legislature supposedly most accountable to the people, are on record refusing to rule out the transfer of nuclear weapons to your “local” police agency. Some of the most outspoken critics of Grayson’s amendment waxed indignant in condemning critics of the ongoing militarization of the police.
“This is absolutely ludicrous to think that the equipment that is utilized by law enforcement is utilized for any reason except for public safety interests, and it happens across this nation every day in a responsible way,” harrumphed Florida Republican Representative Rich Nugent, a former sheriff. Nugent is correct about one thing: Military-grade hardware and war-fighting tactics are used by police “every day”: On average, there are 124 SWAT deployments every day, nearly all of them carried out as drug enforcement raids or to enforce routine search warrants. Many, if not most, of those raids are carried out after sunset or before the dawn.
There is no country on earth where citizens are more likely to experience the “midnight knock” than the United States of America. That fact surely reflects the interests of those who want to monopolize power, rather than a market demand for “security.”
Keynesian Cops
As part of the Obama administration’s “stimulus” package in 2009, the Justice Department increased spending on its Byrne grant and COPS programs — two major conduits for local law enforcement subsidies –by more than $4 billion. At the same time,the Pentagon expanded its 1033 program, through which military-grade hardware and vehicles are provided, on concessionary terms, to local police. The predictable, and subsequently observed, impact of this example of police state Keynesianism was a dramatic escalation in police militancy toward the public. But these federally created distortions in the “security” market have created other, less visible burdens on the public as well.
The police department in Nampa, Idaho, a city of about 80,000 people with a crime rate well below the national average, was one of more than 400 to receive a Mine-Resistant Ambush-Protected (MRAP) vehicle through the Pentagon’s 1033 program. Over the past two years, the Nampa PD also purchased a new fleet of Ford Taurus Police Interceptor patrol vehicles. However, in June Chief Craig Kingsbury went to the City Council to ask for funding to purchase a dozen additional SUV patrol vehicles because the Interceptors “aren’t popular with many of the department’s officers — they’re cramped and uncomfortable for long patrols,” reported the Idaho Press-Tribune.
In the hierarchy of public concerns, “officer comfort” apparently resides very close to the sacred imperative of “officer safety.” Rather than requiring his subordinates to adapt to their vehicles in order to serve their “customers” better, Kingsbury insists on getting another $441,000 in plundered funds to serve the creature comfort of Nampa’s costumed tax-feeders.
Question: If the need for new patrol vehicles is so acute, why doesn’t the Nampa PD sell off its spanking-new MRAP, which has a listed market value of about $500,000? Like hundreds of other departments, the Nampa PD got the MRAP not because of an actual need, but because the Pentagon was willing to give it to them at practically no expense. If we were to assume that the SUV patrol vehicles are a “necessity,” the MRAP should be regarded as a luxury and liquidated as such. That’s how a market-based enterprise would operate, in any case.
However, the only market for MRAPs consists of other police departments that can get them from the Pentagon at negligible expense. Even if the people running the Nampa PD were sufficiently rational and mature to sell off their dangerous new toy, they wouldn’t find a buyer. Unless austerity is somehow imposed on the Nampa PD, the city’s tax victims will eventually be forced to pay nearly the entire price of the “free” MRAP that was provided to the department — a vehicle that has no conceivable use other than providing “force protection” during SWAT raids of the kind that have become commonplace.
Predation, Not Protection
Like most other police agencies, the Nampa PD devours roughly half the municipal budget, and much of that expense is devoted to salaries. In 2010, seven of the ten highest-paid municipal positions in Nampa were filled by “public safety” officials, only one of whom — Fire Chief Karl Malott — was not a police officer. Coming in at number four on that list was Corporal (now Sergeant) Jason Cantrell, who received $104,173 in total compensation — nearly as much as then-Chief Bill Augsburger. Another corporal, Chadrick Shepard, finished at ninth place on the list with an annual haul of $93,559.
The median salary for a Nampa patrol officer is $50,214 – about $4,000 more than Idaho’s median household income, and roughly $14,000 more than the typical household income in the city supposedly “served” by that police department.A “parking and compliance officer” for the Nampa PD – that is, a state functionary who writes parking tickets — can expect a starting salary of $13.50 an hour. By way of contrast, an entry-level “security officer” employed by Secure Solutions to provide protection for private and commercial property in neighboring Boise is offered $10.00 an hour.
These disparities in compensation are not the product of natural market forces, because police and private security officers are not serving the same market: The later protect property, the former protect those who prey upon it. Even in the era of the all-encompassing Homeland Security State,privately employed security officers outnumber government-employed cops by at least three to one.
If government law enforcement agencies performed the advertised function of “protecting and serving” property rights, it wouldn’t be necessary for property owners to pay for their own security services. It has been known for decades — specifically, since the Police Foundation’s year-long study of the impact of “preventive patrols” on crime rates in the early 1970s — that government law enforcement patrols do nothing to reduce or deter property crimes, such as “burglaries, auto thefts, larcenies … robberies, or vandalism.” Private security services, such as Detroit’s Threat Management Center, provide much better protection – as do armed citizens, as Detroit’s Police Chief James Craig has admitted.
Once again,this isn’t surprising: Government-employed police have no enforceable duty to protect persons and property, even those to whom they have made explicit promises of individual protection. In fact, citizens are expected to protect the police – and some have found themselves being sued by officers who accused them of failing to provide that protection.
New York City was the first jurisdiction to adopt Peel’s model of paramilitary policing. Three years ago, NYPD officer Terrance Howell, who had been sent to find a deranged slasher-killer named Maxim Gelman, who had murdered three people, watched from the operator’s booth of a subway car while a martial arts expert named Joseph Lozito tackled and subdued the suspect. As Gelman slashed at the back of Lozito’s head, the desperate, bleeding man pleaded for help from Officer Howell, who did nothing to intervene. It was not until after Lozito had pinned Gelman to the floor and disarmed him that Howell emerged from his secure location and told Lozito, “You can get up now.”
Howell, the “hero cop” who was photographed triumphantly escorting Gelman in handcuffs, admitted to a member of a grand jury that he had hid from the suspect out of fear for his safety. After Lozito filed a tort claim for negligence, city attorney David Santoro explained that “Under well-established law, the police are not liable for such incidents” because police have “no special duty” to protect any individual citizen – even one who is literally bleeding to death a few feet away as he heroically subdues a psychotic murderer.
“Next time you hear people call cops trigger-happy or complain about their overtime and pensions, think of Police Officer Terrance Howell,” pontificated the New York Daily News in a reflexive paean to the police after Gelman’s arrest.
Ironically, that is a very good suggestion. Here is a better one: Next time you are told that police protect the public, remember Joseph Lozito.
Where protection of property is concerned, police are much worse than useless. Their job is to enforce the will of the predatory class that employs them, which is why we would be safer without them.
* * * * *
I long had my suspicions as to the origin of police agencies, as they emerged in the 19th century, due to their ties to corrupt and evil organizations such as the Pinkerton Detective Agency and the Wackenhut Corporation. However, I was unaware of the ties between the British oppression of Ireland and the creation of London's Metropolitan Police; Robert Peel has much to answer for. Though I have long though that the bunker mentality of the cop culture was largely self-inflicted, I did not realize that their origins in the brutal occupation forces in Ireland were there by design.
This validates the experiences in the United States of minority communities nation-wide: the purpose of Law Enforcement is to be the Praetorian Guard for the Elite, whose purpose is to "serve and protect" their masters, to enforce the regime. This is why Posse Comitatus was never a big deal; the "standing armies" fear of the Founders manifested not in the fear of regular soldiers on the streets (or even reservists or the National Guard), but exists--and has existed for generations now--in the form of uniformed paramilitaries (the aforementioned police agencies) playing legbreaker to their employers (who are just gangsters with good publicity).
Which means that we now run into an issue with the civic cult we've been indoctrinated with since birth, which is that cops are superior beings due to being cops and as such are to enjoy privileged status against the common people- and that to resist them is to commit blasphemy against the great god Authority. To suggest otherwise, to say that they are but ordinary men and subject to the same universal morality that everyone else abides by, and therefore can be--and should be--foricibly resisted when they turn their predatory behaviors against you and move to violate your body or property--to do violence to you or yours--by any means necessary, up to and including killing them, is an act of blasphemy to those in thrall to the Thin Blue Line Cult.
Of course, as with any other religion, this claim is false. The Thin Blue Line Cult is a sect within the larger false faith of "Government". This is, in fact, a religion dedicated to Empire in the guise of "authority" (as Mark Passio, in other words, explains in his seminars), and as such is as false as all other religions are. It destroys lives--the term is "democide"--and consumes nations; it's a cult. Yes, that's what this really is: a destructive religious cult. The dogma of the cult promotes all of the predatory behavior in the article above, and uses magical thinking and logical fallacies to brainwash the population (in conjunction to their own terrorist acts; this is not hyperbole- committing acts of violence against civilian populations for the expressed purpose of gaining and keeping compliance to their will is the very definition of terrorism.
As this is a religion, with a god--"Authority"--that does not exist in reality, I am as much an atheist here as I am elsewhere. It is not evil to resist criminal frauds, and it certain is not evil to resist violence done to perpetuate such frauds; belief in authority is as much a sign of arrested development--of being a cognitive child--as earnest belief in Santa or the Tooth Fairy, and so when individuals freak out at the suggest that it is okay to shoot--even kill--cops when they cross the line, I cannot help but to think of it as akin to telling a Scientologist that L. Ron Hubbard is a fraud who continues to ply suckers from well beyond the grave (such as most Scientologists) and that they are materially contributing by--and are accountable for--their acts on behalf of that criminal organization.
Remember, "this nonviolent stuff'll get you killed", as we see so often with disarmed or ill-armed populations facing oppressive occupations. The people of Ferguson, as with Gaza and all other peoples under occupation, should arm themselves and resist by force--which, obviously, means that killing is on the table; dead predators can't prey upon you--EVERYONE that seeks to do violence to them, to violate their bodies (or those of their dependents) or their property. The use of force, especially deadly force, against those initiating violence is not only NOT a crime, it is a necessary and vital act to secure and defend Civilization. The insistence, based on "authority", to the contrary is a criminal fraud and will NOT be entertained by any rational and mature individual.
No, it's NOT okay if you're wearing a uniform.
No, it's NOT okay if you're wearing a badge.
No, it's NOT okay if you're "following orders". (That shit went out at Nuremburg.)
No, it's NOT okay if another man--regardless of what he wears, what he says, or what thing on a piece of paper he points to says--tells you that it's okay because he is lying to you. No man can absolve you of responsibility for your actions.
YOU are responsible for your actions, ever and always; if you prey upon someone (under the color of law or not), and you suffer an injury or die due to the use of force against you in the work of resisting your violation of them, then you deserved it and it is NEVER wrong to employ such force--to do such work, even if it kills the violator--to resist violence. Little Timmy, in time, will be told that his parent died because he was a bad man who did evil things to other people, and the reason that you aren't here anymore is because he got put down by someone who had the means and the opportunity to put a stop to it. It has happened before, and until Empire falls it will happen again.
Those who cannot accept this are not yet adults.
No, The Police Don’t Work for You
By Matt Agorist on July 21st, 2014.
Law enforcement is a “product” we are forced to buy
“The police are worthless. I don’t know what we’re paying them for.” Pro Libertate
William N. Grigg
July 21, 2014
That familiar, despairing lament was voiced by a friend here in Payette after his family had lost $20,000 worth of property a burglary. The crime was solved before the police intervened: Some of the pilfered property was still in possession of the suspects, who admitted that it didn’t belong to them. Working on their own initiative, my friend and his adult daughter — the primary victim — tracked down more of the stolen goods at local yard sales and garage sales.
A phone call to the Payette PD led to a visit by an officer who was courteous, professional, and who provided no practical help of any kind. He did arrest one suspect, a mentally deficient man who readily admitted to the officer that he had taken the property because an unspecified “they” had told him it was “all right” to do so.
Neither the responding officer, nor the colleague who took over the case when the first officer went on vacation, expended any effort to identify who “they” were, or to press charges against the accomplices. The case was closed with the arrest of a solitary man — a registered sex offender — who “became somewhat upset [because] he was the only one who was going to be in trouble for the thefts that occurred, because he was honest,” as an investigative report summarized.
“The police wouldn’t bother to fingerprint my stolen property,” Elizabeth Puckett, the owner of the property, recounted to me. “When I asked why, the officer said, `Well, we’re not CSI.’” It shouldn’t be assumed that the Payette PD is consistently insouciant about the collection of forensic evidence. A few years ago, Puckett recalls, she received a visit from the Animal Control officer (an official with whom I’ve had some experience) after the department received a report that “we had a dog that looked like a pit bull.”
A county ordinance enacted several years ago during a spasm of civic alarm forbids residents to “own, possess, keep, exercise control over, maintain, harbor, transport, buy or sell” pit bulls or “dangerous dogs” displaying pit bull characteristics. Those who owned such dogs prior to enactment of the ban were required to register them with the police (who were exempt from the ordinance, of course), “keep $1 million liability insurance, have a microchip ID … implanted in the dog, and pay an annual pit bull license fee.” Dogs owned by people not in compliance with the edict “are subject to impoundment and destruction.”
“The officer told us that if we were going to keep it we would have to have a blood test,” Elizabeth recalled. “So I would have had to pay $100 for a blood test, and still could lose the dog if it displayed the wrong `characteristics.’ So I just let the dog go.”
The same Payette Police Department that couldn’t help Elizabeth recover her stolen property was diligent in taking her property, even though she had done no injury to anybody else. This is because the Payette PD, like every other agency of its kind, is involved in law enforcement, rather than the protection of persons and property. It defines its role in terms of what its officers can do to people, rather than what they are required to do for people.
No, Police Don’t Work for You
When a disgusted citizen tells an abusive police officer that he pays the officer’s salary, the victim is committing a category error. Those of us who constitute the productive sector don’t pay the police; they are paid by the people who plunder our property at gunpoint. Once it is understood that police employed by the people who commit aggression against our property, we shouldn’t be surprised that police are of practically no value in terms of protecting property against criminal aggression. Police are properly seen as retail-level distributors of violence on behalf of the coercion cartel.
Law enforcement is a “product” we are forced to buy, and severely punished — through summary application of torture, or even by death — if we refuse. Since law enforcement operates as a monopoly, rather than through the market, there is no legitimate pricing mechanism to guide rational allocation of resources, and no way to measure “customer” satisfaction — although using the term “customer” in this context is a bit like using the term “girlfriend” to describe a rape victim.
Indeed, the institutional response of law enforcement to public dissatisfaction is to expand and escalate the behavior that inspired the discontent, and treat persistent criticism as evidence of criminal intent. Witness recent developments in Albuquerque, where outrage over serial police homicides — including the death squad-style murder last March of James Boyd, an unarmed homeless man — generated a substantial organized protest movement.
After infuriated protesters took control of a city council meeting to place the defiant APD Chief Gorden Eden “on trial,” the city government’s reaction was not to cashier the official who had instigated the outrage, but rather to impose new restrictions on citizen participation in city council meetings.
When protesters held a subsequent public “mock trial” of Chief Eden at a peaceful public demonstration, the gathering was infiltrated by a several undercover police officers, including a detective who had shot a 20-year-old in the stomach during a drug sting in 2010. As public frustration and discontent continue to rise in Albuquerque, the APD has responded to the growing dissatisfaction of its “clientele” by spending $350,000 to purchase 350 AR-15 rifles – the same type that were used to slaughter Boyd in the foothills outside the city just a few weeks earlier.
The Albuquerque Police Department, like dozens of others nation-wide, has displayed what the Justice Department calls a “pattern and practice” of excessive force. If it were a private corporation, it would be the target of lawsuits and, most likely, criminal prosecution. Unlike a private entity, however, a police department is protected by the fiction of “sovereign immunity,” and its employees are shielded from personal accountability through “qualified immunity.”
While exceptionally corrupt police departments are occasionally disbanded, their “markets” are quickly captured by other agencies that will provide the same “service.” Individual police officers who distinguish themselves through abusive and criminal behavior — which, given the competition, is a significant accomplishment — sometimes find themselves briefly unemployed. However, they often become “gypsy cops” and find employment elsewhere as state-licensed purveyors of violence.
“Operational Security” rather than Accountability
One fact not adequately understood by the public is that even geographically local police departments are not locally accountable. Police chiefs are not elected officials; they are appointed by the municipal corporation that employs them. Police departments describe themselves as public agencies for the purpose of “qualified immunity.” However, as the recent ACLU report on police militarization revealed, an increasing number of police agencies are claiming to be “private corporations” exempt from open records laws.
This isn’t the only tactic employed by police agencies to impede transparency and accountability to the public supposedly “served” by them.
I recently filed a public records request with the Malheur County Sheriff’s Office regarding the disposal of a huge quantity of marijuana that had been seized by a nearby multi-jurisdictional narcotics task force. Undersheriff Travis Johnson informed me that he could provide “photo documentation” of the marijuana being buried at a local landfill. “The cost to produce those records will be one hour of labor at $48.11 and one CD at $10 for a total of $58.11,” according to Johnson.
Both the “labor” and materials involved in fulfilling that records request have already been paid for. The information — which, interestingly, was not provided to the defense as discovery during a recently-concluded trial — should be easy to find. All that is necessary would be for a MCSO functionary to insert a CD into a computer and click a mouse. A single CD — assuming that Malheur County buys them in bulk – would cost less than twenty cents. The market rate for
Opacity of this kind is hardly compatible with a “public service” agency. It is entirely appropriate, however, for an entity that sees the public as hostile and thus makes “operational security” a priority.
Even before “local” police agencies were effectively satellitized by the federal government they were paramilitary bodies designed to operate as occupation forces, rather than as a protective service. In creating his London Metropolitan Police, Robert Peel adapted the model he had employed in creating the “Peace Preservation Force,” a specialized unit within the 20,000-man military contingent Peel had commanded as military governor of occupied Ireland.
Peel’s Militaristic Model
Writing in the December 1961 Journal of Modern History, Galen Broekker observed that when Peel was appointed governor in 1814, his objective in creating the Peace Preservation Force was “`pacifying’ a recalcitrant population.” For several years prior to Peel’s appointment, rural insurgents called “banditti” had been fighting among themselves and occasionally attacking British outposts. Of much greater concern to occupation authorities, however, was evidence of involvement by “respectable people” in “insurrectionary activity of a political nature.”
At the time of Peel’s arrival, the crime rate in Ireland wasn’t particularly high, so he took advantage of a “lull” to “muster the forces of authority in anticipation of the inevitable trouble to come” as English authorities took aggressive action to stamp out separatism. The “Peace Preservation Force” — which was the prototype for every modern police agency — wasn’t designed to protect person and property from criminal aggression, but rather to protect a political elite. This is why Peel’s London Metropolitan Police Force was initially greeted with hostility by conservatives in the British Parliament and the public at large, who often referred to officers as “Blue Locusts.” Within a decade, however, Peel’s model was firmly entrenched in London, and migrated across the Atlantic to New York City.
As evangelists of “Manifest Destiny” carved their bloody path to the Pacific, an Americanized version of Peel’s police concept was among the chief tenets of their gospel of government-imposed “civilization.” It wasn’t until the early 1970s, however, that the latent militarism of the police was given expression when the Nixon administration declared “war” on drugs. This led to the proliferation of SWAT teams, which were modelled after counter-insurgency units organized by the CIA as part of its Phoenix Program in Vietnam.
Declining Crime, Escalating Police Militarism
Beginning in the 1970s, the official rhetoric of law enforcement became overtly martial, a tendency that has grown in crescendo. However, by most measures, violent crime has been in decline for five decades. A similar trend is visible regarding on-the-job police fatalities. Joseph McNamara, former NYPD Deputy Inspector, points out that police “work” is actually much safer today than it has been in a half-century or more. Law enforcement is not found in the top ten “most dangerous occupations” in the annual list compiled by the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
Yet police insist that the United States “has become a war zone,” in the words of Sheriff Michael Gayer of Indiana’s Pulaski County. This is entirely true — but only in the sense that the police consider themselves at war with the public, and have fully embraced a mindset compatible with their role as an occupying army.
As was the case when Peel created his “Peace Preservation Force” in Ireland two centuries ago, the Power Elite has been relentlessly expanding its domestic army of occupation and indoctrinating those enlisted therein to see the public as its enemy — ”in anticipation of the inevitable trouble to come.”
Just a few weeks ago, the House of Representatives recently rejected, by a dramatic margin, an amendment to a military spending bill proposed by Florida Democratic Representative Alan Grayson that would have placed theoretical limits on the transfer of war-fighting assets to local police departments. Mind you, that measure would not have shut down the Pentagon’s pipeline to the police; it would have forbidden future transfers of high-capacity weaponry, including armed drones, armored vehicles, grenade launchers, “toxicological agents,… guided missiles, ballistic missiles, rockets, torpedoes, bombs, mines, or nuclear weapons.”
The amendment was rejected by a vote of 355 to 62 — which means that 355 members of the House of Representatives, the branch of the federal legislature supposedly most accountable to the people, are on record refusing to rule out the transfer of nuclear weapons to your “local” police agency. Some of the most outspoken critics of Grayson’s amendment waxed indignant in condemning critics of the ongoing militarization of the police.
“This is absolutely ludicrous to think that the equipment that is utilized by law enforcement is utilized for any reason except for public safety interests, and it happens across this nation every day in a responsible way,” harrumphed Florida Republican Representative Rich Nugent, a former sheriff. Nugent is correct about one thing: Military-grade hardware and war-fighting tactics are used by police “every day”: On average, there are 124 SWAT deployments every day, nearly all of them carried out as drug enforcement raids or to enforce routine search warrants. Many, if not most, of those raids are carried out after sunset or before the dawn.
There is no country on earth where citizens are more likely to experience the “midnight knock” than the United States of America. That fact surely reflects the interests of those who want to monopolize power, rather than a market demand for “security.”
Keynesian Cops
As part of the Obama administration’s “stimulus” package in 2009, the Justice Department increased spending on its Byrne grant and COPS programs — two major conduits for local law enforcement subsidies –by more than $4 billion. At the same time,
The police department in Nampa, Idaho, a city of about 80,000 people with a crime rate well below the national average, was one of more than 400 to receive a Mine-Resistant Ambush-Protected (MRAP) vehicle through the Pentagon’s 1033 program. Over the past two years, the Nampa PD also purchased a new fleet of Ford Taurus Police Interceptor patrol vehicles. However, in June Chief Craig Kingsbury went to the City Council to ask for funding to purchase a dozen additional SUV patrol vehicles because the Interceptors “aren’t popular with many of the department’s officers — they’re cramped and uncomfortable for long patrols,” reported the Idaho Press-Tribune.
In the hierarchy of public concerns, “officer comfort” apparently resides very close to the sacred imperative of “officer safety.” Rather than requiring his subordinates to adapt to their vehicles in order to serve their “customers” better, Kingsbury insists on getting another $441,000 in plundered funds to serve the creature comfort of Nampa’s costumed tax-feeders.
Question: If the need for new patrol vehicles is so acute, why doesn’t the Nampa PD sell off its spanking-new MRAP, which has a listed market value of about $500,000? Like hundreds of other departments, the Nampa PD got the MRAP not because of an actual need, but because the Pentagon was willing to give it to them at practically no expense. If we were to assume that the SUV patrol vehicles are a “necessity,” the MRAP should be regarded as a luxury and liquidated as such. That’s how a market-based enterprise would operate, in any case.
However, the only market for MRAPs consists of other police departments that can get them from the Pentagon at negligible expense. Even if the people running the Nampa PD were sufficiently rational and mature to sell off their dangerous new toy, they wouldn’t find a buyer. Unless austerity is somehow imposed on the Nampa PD, the city’s tax victims will eventually be forced to pay nearly the entire price of the “free” MRAP that was provided to the department — a vehicle that has no conceivable use other than providing “force protection” during SWAT raids of the kind that have become commonplace.
Predation, Not Protection
Like most other police agencies, the Nampa PD devours roughly half the municipal budget, and much of that expense is devoted to salaries. In 2010, seven of the ten highest-paid municipal positions in Nampa were filled by “public safety” officials, only one of whom — Fire Chief Karl Malott — was not a police officer. Coming in at number four on that list was Corporal (now Sergeant) Jason Cantrell, who received $104,173 in total compensation — nearly as much as then-Chief Bill Augsburger. Another corporal, Chadrick Shepard, finished at ninth place on the list with an annual haul of $93,559.
The median salary for a Nampa patrol officer is $50,214 – about $4,000 more than Idaho’s median household income, and roughly $14,000 more than the typical household income in the city supposedly “served” by that police department.
These disparities in compensation are not the product of natural market forces, because police and private security officers are not serving the same market: The later protect property, the former protect those who prey upon it. Even in the era of the all-encompassing Homeland Security State,
If government law enforcement agencies performed the advertised function of “protecting and serving” property rights, it wouldn’t be necessary for property owners to pay for their own security services. It has been known for decades — specifically, since the Police Foundation’s year-long study of the impact of “preventive patrols” on crime rates in the early 1970s — that government law enforcement patrols do nothing to reduce or deter property crimes, such as “burglaries, auto thefts, larcenies … robberies, or vandalism.” Private security services, such as Detroit’s Threat Management Center, provide much better protection – as do armed citizens, as Detroit’s Police Chief James Craig has admitted.
Once again,
New York City was the first jurisdiction to adopt Peel’s model of paramilitary policing. Three years ago, NYPD officer Terrance Howell, who had been sent to find a deranged slasher-killer named Maxim Gelman, who had murdered three people, watched from the operator’s booth of a subway car while a martial arts expert named Joseph Lozito tackled and subdued the suspect. As Gelman slashed at the back of Lozito’s head, the desperate, bleeding man pleaded for help from Officer Howell, who did nothing to intervene. It was not until after Lozito had pinned Gelman to the floor and disarmed him that Howell emerged from his secure location and told Lozito, “You can get up now.”
Howell, the “hero cop” who was photographed triumphantly escorting Gelman in handcuffs, admitted to a member of a grand jury that he had hid from the suspect out of fear for his safety. After Lozito filed a tort claim for negligence, city attorney David Santoro explained that “Under well-established law, the police are not liable for such incidents” because police have “no special duty” to protect any individual citizen – even one who is literally bleeding to death a few feet away as he heroically subdues a psychotic murderer.
“Next time you hear people call cops trigger-happy or complain about their overtime and pensions, think of Police Officer Terrance Howell,” pontificated the New York Daily News in a reflexive paean to the police after Gelman’s arrest.
Ironically, that is a very good suggestion. Here is a better one: Next time you are told that police protect the public, remember Joseph Lozito.
Where protection of property is concerned, police are much worse than useless. Their job is to enforce the will of the predatory class that employs them, which is why we would be safer without them.
I long had my suspicions as to the origin of police agencies, as they emerged in the 19th century, due to their ties to corrupt and evil organizations such as the Pinkerton Detective Agency and the Wackenhut Corporation. However, I was unaware of the ties between the British oppression of Ireland and the creation of London's Metropolitan Police; Robert Peel has much to answer for. Though I have long though that the bunker mentality of the cop culture was largely self-inflicted, I did not realize that their origins in the brutal occupation forces in Ireland were there by design.
This validates the experiences in the United States of minority communities nation-wide: the purpose of Law Enforcement is to be the Praetorian Guard for the Elite, whose purpose is to "serve and protect" their masters, to enforce the regime. This is why Posse Comitatus was never a big deal; the "standing armies" fear of the Founders manifested not in the fear of regular soldiers on the streets (or even reservists or the National Guard), but exists--and has existed for generations now--in the form of uniformed paramilitaries (the aforementioned police agencies) playing legbreaker to their employers (who are just gangsters with good publicity).
Which means that we now run into an issue with the civic cult we've been indoctrinated with since birth, which is that cops are superior beings due to being cops and as such are to enjoy privileged status against the common people- and that to resist them is to commit blasphemy against the great god Authority. To suggest otherwise, to say that they are but ordinary men and subject to the same universal morality that everyone else abides by, and therefore can be--and should be--foricibly resisted when they turn their predatory behaviors against you and move to violate your body or property--to do violence to you or yours--by any means necessary, up to and including killing them, is an act of blasphemy to those in thrall to the Thin Blue Line Cult.
Of course, as with any other religion, this claim is false. The Thin Blue Line Cult is a sect within the larger false faith of "Government". This is, in fact, a religion dedicated to Empire in the guise of "authority" (as Mark Passio, in other words, explains in his seminars), and as such is as false as all other religions are. It destroys lives--the term is "democide"--and consumes nations; it's a cult. Yes, that's what this really is: a destructive religious cult. The dogma of the cult promotes all of the predatory behavior in the article above, and uses magical thinking and logical fallacies to brainwash the population (in conjunction to their own terrorist acts; this is not hyperbole- committing acts of violence against civilian populations for the expressed purpose of gaining and keeping compliance to their will is the very definition of terrorism.
As this is a religion, with a god--"Authority"--that does not exist in reality, I am as much an atheist here as I am elsewhere. It is not evil to resist criminal frauds, and it certain is not evil to resist violence done to perpetuate such frauds; belief in authority is as much a sign of arrested development--of being a cognitive child--as earnest belief in Santa or the Tooth Fairy, and so when individuals freak out at the suggest that it is okay to shoot--even kill--cops when they cross the line, I cannot help but to think of it as akin to telling a Scientologist that L. Ron Hubbard is a fraud who continues to ply suckers from well beyond the grave (such as most Scientologists) and that they are materially contributing by--and are accountable for--their acts on behalf of that criminal organization.
Remember, "this nonviolent stuff'll get you killed", as we see so often with disarmed or ill-armed populations facing oppressive occupations. The people of Ferguson, as with Gaza and all other peoples under occupation, should arm themselves and resist by force--which, obviously, means that killing is on the table; dead predators can't prey upon you--EVERYONE that seeks to do violence to them, to violate their bodies (or those of their dependents) or their property. The use of force, especially deadly force, against those initiating violence is not only NOT a crime, it is a necessary and vital act to secure and defend Civilization. The insistence, based on "authority", to the contrary is a criminal fraud and will NOT be entertained by any rational and mature individual.
No, it's NOT okay if you're wearing a uniform.
No, it's NOT okay if you're wearing a badge.
No, it's NOT okay if you're "following orders". (That shit went out at Nuremburg.)
No, it's NOT okay if another man--regardless of what he wears, what he says, or what thing on a piece of paper he points to says--tells you that it's okay because he is lying to you. No man can absolve you of responsibility for your actions.
YOU are responsible for your actions, ever and always; if you prey upon someone (under the color of law or not), and you suffer an injury or die due to the use of force against you in the work of resisting your violation of them, then you deserved it and it is NEVER wrong to employ such force--to do such work, even if it kills the violator--to resist violence. Little Timmy, in time, will be told that his parent died because he was a bad man who did evil things to other people, and the reason that you aren't here anymore is because he got put down by someone who had the means and the opportunity to put a stop to it. It has happened before, and until Empire falls it will happen again.
Those who cannot accept this are not yet adults.
Thursday, August 14, 2014
Mark Passio - Street-Wise Spirituality - St. Louis, MO
Version 3 of Passio's previous seminar on Natural Law.
Wednesday, June 11, 2014
Friday, May 16, 2014
Sunday, May 11, 2014
Mothers, Send Never Your Sons To War, For All Wars Abroad Are Bankers' Wars
In the United States, today is Mother's Day. In a few short weeks, we will observe Memorial Day (and the unofficial start of Summer here). These days should be better-connected.
I could spend this space railing about this artificial holiday of Mother's Day, but I will refrain; it has useful roots, and elsewhere may well be far more beneficial that it is here in the United States (where it is subsumed into the Great Secular Cult and used to further put resistance to the excesses of Empire into place in the minds of we Americans). I shall instead focus on that useful element.
Today, it is useful to recall a recent post I made where I linked to an open letter to the American People by Alexander Dugin on the events in Ukraine (which you can find here). Mr. Dugin made a point that we are routinely conditioned by government to forget: that we have far, far more in common with the common people all over the world than we do with our own elites. (They, in turn, have more common with the elites of the world than they do with us.)
The wars we've seen in the United States, for all of the 20th Century and much of the 19th, are not true and just wars against an aggressor preying upon us--be that aggressor within or without--but instead the end result of psychological manipulations worked by those elites (those now, or their predecessors) upon us and our counterparts abroad. We are but useful materials to them, bodies to be worked and bled until we break or die--until we are consumed in their war machines, or their mines, or their fields, or their offices, etc.--and until then pacified by entertainments and misdirected with toxic "culture" promulgated by media outlets that this class owns. They use knowledge of the human mind that we are conditioned to ignore (see Passio, Gnostic Media, School Sucks, Peace Revolution, etc.), and then the mothers of the United States are cajoled and bribed to send their sons (and now, daughters) off to these obscene and blasphemous atrocities of mass human sacrifice that we are expected to call "wars" to preserve "freedom" from a threat (that never existed in reality; the wars are fake, but the slaughters are real) that demands terrible military retribution.
The beneficiaries of the wars are neither common peoples. It's always the elites, first in the making of the wars, then in the winning, and finally in the rebuilding. They benefit coming and going due to their command of the international banking system; loans made to beligerents to fight the wars, loans rolled over and extended in ending the wars, and then outright looting of the losing state by the winner in addition to more loans and foreign corporate "investment". John Perkins puts this latter phase out in Confessions of an Economic Hit Man, and as for the former one need only look at the history of the U.S. National Debt.
These are bankers' wars, and no bankers' war is a just one. It is a predatory act, and those who follow orders (as Mark Passio puts it so bluntly) are more guilty than those who give them--"I was just following orders." is not only not an excuse, it is a confession to Crimes Against Humanity--because orders can be, and should be, refused. Stop contributing to your own enslavement by participating, including by paying for them, but--first and foremost--by ceasing and desisting forevermore to send your sons to be butchered on their altars to their demon-god Mammon. To wage war to defend against predators is just; to become one yourself is to condone, suborn, and sanction slavery and even worse crimes against your fellow Man.
Mothers of the world, refuse to let your children become (and behalf as) predators. Train your eyes, and arms, on the true enemy of Mankind: the predatory elites who feed upon you, and upon your children whom your gave your body and risked life and health to bring into this world- and respect your fellow mothers who did likewise to bring theirs into this world also. Force them to put forth their real aims: force them to run out the drones, to reveal what they really want--robot-like obedient butcher machines--and you will come to see Empire fall.
I could spend this space railing about this artificial holiday of Mother's Day, but I will refrain; it has useful roots, and elsewhere may well be far more beneficial that it is here in the United States (where it is subsumed into the Great Secular Cult and used to further put resistance to the excesses of Empire into place in the minds of we Americans). I shall instead focus on that useful element.
Today, it is useful to recall a recent post I made where I linked to an open letter to the American People by Alexander Dugin on the events in Ukraine (which you can find here). Mr. Dugin made a point that we are routinely conditioned by government to forget: that we have far, far more in common with the common people all over the world than we do with our own elites. (They, in turn, have more common with the elites of the world than they do with us.)
The wars we've seen in the United States, for all of the 20th Century and much of the 19th, are not true and just wars against an aggressor preying upon us--be that aggressor within or without--but instead the end result of psychological manipulations worked by those elites (those now, or their predecessors) upon us and our counterparts abroad. We are but useful materials to them, bodies to be worked and bled until we break or die--until we are consumed in their war machines, or their mines, or their fields, or their offices, etc.--and until then pacified by entertainments and misdirected with toxic "culture" promulgated by media outlets that this class owns. They use knowledge of the human mind that we are conditioned to ignore (see Passio, Gnostic Media, School Sucks, Peace Revolution, etc.), and then the mothers of the United States are cajoled and bribed to send their sons (and now, daughters) off to these obscene and blasphemous atrocities of mass human sacrifice that we are expected to call "wars" to preserve "freedom" from a threat (that never existed in reality; the wars are fake, but the slaughters are real) that demands terrible military retribution.
The beneficiaries of the wars are neither common peoples. It's always the elites, first in the making of the wars, then in the winning, and finally in the rebuilding. They benefit coming and going due to their command of the international banking system; loans made to beligerents to fight the wars, loans rolled over and extended in ending the wars, and then outright looting of the losing state by the winner in addition to more loans and foreign corporate "investment". John Perkins puts this latter phase out in Confessions of an Economic Hit Man, and as for the former one need only look at the history of the U.S. National Debt.
These are bankers' wars, and no bankers' war is a just one. It is a predatory act, and those who follow orders (as Mark Passio puts it so bluntly) are more guilty than those who give them--"I was just following orders." is not only not an excuse, it is a confession to Crimes Against Humanity--because orders can be, and should be, refused. Stop contributing to your own enslavement by participating, including by paying for them, but--first and foremost--by ceasing and desisting forevermore to send your sons to be butchered on their altars to their demon-god Mammon. To wage war to defend against predators is just; to become one yourself is to condone, suborn, and sanction slavery and even worse crimes against your fellow Man.
Mothers of the world, refuse to let your children become (and behalf as) predators. Train your eyes, and arms, on the true enemy of Mankind: the predatory elites who feed upon you, and upon your children whom your gave your body and risked life and health to bring into this world- and respect your fellow mothers who did likewise to bring theirs into this world also. Force them to put forth their real aims: force them to run out the drones, to reveal what they really want--robot-like obedient butcher machines--and you will come to see Empire fall.
Saturday, May 10, 2014
The Corbett Report: Interview 880 – Ryan Grant Explains Distributism
Corbett's Description: "Today on the program we explore the philosophy of distributism and its attempt to create a decentralized economy based on the widespread distribution of private property. Joining us to help explore this topic is Ryan Grant, contributing editor of The Distributist Review."
Audio only. Original post is here. Play streaming here, Download it here.
Audio only. Original post is here. Play streaming here, Download it here.
Tuesday, April 29, 2014
Friday, April 18, 2014
The Season of Sacrifice & The New Age Religion Debunked
Description: "On this edition of Down The Rabbit Hole, Popeye welcomes back to the broadcast friend, and occulted knowledge specialist Mark Passio. The two of them cover a few topics tonight. Starting off they get into "The Season of Sacrifice" that takes place every year in the beginning of April, and it's origins. They showcase how many different tragedies have happened during this time period. Then they expose the the new age movement for what it is. Make sure to tune into this powerful, and insightful broadcast."
Sunday, February 9, 2014
Authority is a Fraud
I could waste a good chunk of my time writing an essay about this, but that would be fucking stupid. Instead, I'll use this segment from Mark Passio's presentation last year. Summarized (taken from the uploader's Description): "Mark Passio explains how "AUTHORITY" is an ILLUSION of a diseased psyche, based entirely in VIOLENCE and built upon the erroneous and dogmatic BELIEF that some people are MASTERS who have the moral right to issue commands, and others are SLAVES who have a moral obligation to obey the Masters."
Instead, I'll spend a bit of time writing about one big ramification of this fact.
Remember Nuremberg? "I was just following orders!" was not accepted as a defense.
It doesn't stop with (now long dead) Nazis. It applies to everyone. It applies to everyone THAT EVER LIVED, IS ALIVE NOW, OR SHALL EVER LIVE.
When someone claims authority, what they are really doing is saying "You will do as I say or I will violate you. If you still exist thereafter, I will threaten you again, and I will violate you again if you fail to comply. I will repeat this until you either die or you comply." They will claim that their costume magically confers this "authority", or that some man-made words--some ink on paper or bits in a database--does so, but when pressed they will inevitably resort to violence--they will violate you--and terrorize you into compliance. "Authority" is nothing more than Terrorism.
All of the claimed good can be done just as well, if not better, by individuals voluntarily associating to achieve the same ends- no coercion needed. No claim to the contrary is valid; all of them, when examined, turn out to be unintended byproducts of a scam intended to enforce some form of slavery upon a population. Free peoples are superior in all respects to achieving these goals. Walk away from Omelas, folks, and take that forsaken child with you.
Instead, I'll spend a bit of time writing about one big ramification of this fact.
Remember Nuremberg? "I was just following orders!" was not accepted as a defense.
It doesn't stop with (now long dead) Nazis. It applies to everyone. It applies to everyone THAT EVER LIVED, IS ALIVE NOW, OR SHALL EVER LIVE.
When someone claims authority, what they are really doing is saying "You will do as I say or I will violate you. If you still exist thereafter, I will threaten you again, and I will violate you again if you fail to comply. I will repeat this until you either die or you comply." They will claim that their costume magically confers this "authority", or that some man-made words--some ink on paper or bits in a database--does so, but when pressed they will inevitably resort to violence--they will violate you--and terrorize you into compliance. "Authority" is nothing more than Terrorism.
All of the claimed good can be done just as well, if not better, by individuals voluntarily associating to achieve the same ends- no coercion needed. No claim to the contrary is valid; all of them, when examined, turn out to be unintended byproducts of a scam intended to enforce some form of slavery upon a population. Free peoples are superior in all respects to achieving these goals. Walk away from Omelas, folks, and take that forsaken child with you.
Saturday, February 8, 2014
The Rothschild Rockefeller Cartel VS Humanity / An Interview with Richard Grove
The folks at SGTReport said this of the video below: "Forensic historian, filmmaker, whistle blower and researcher Richard Grove from, TragedyAndHope.com joins us to talk about the enemies of humanity and the tools they use to rob of us of our autonomy and our ability to think critically. Richards says the Rothschild-Rockefeller cartel and the powers-that-be are intra-species kleptoparasites who have incrementally, methodically, and systematically destroyed our culture, education system and our news media. It's an all out WAR on humanity. Richard is one of the most well read researchers we have ever had the pleasure of interviewing, and this one is not to be missed."
Sunday, February 2, 2014
The Way to Kill Empire Is Here
All of those Mark Passio videos weren't posted for shits and giggles. There was a purpose.
The reason that I posted those videos is because Passio laid out a foundation for a free, independent, and practical alternative to our current paradigm of slavery to and consumption by Empire. It is an individualist paradigm, not a collectivist one. It eschews the Pythonesque infighting amongst various cliques of Anarchism as being, quite frankly, useless bullshit. Sure, you've got Ancient Aliens and lots of other whackado to go with it, but what do you expect from a self-admitted former Satanist? The whackado is not the point; the point is the emphasis on Natural Law, our relationship to it, and how returning to a strict adherence of it will lead to Empire's fall- and with it, the healing of Mankind's long-running dysfunction.
In the Natural Law seminar Passio lays out the who, what, when, and where of What On Earth Is Happening. The Cosmic Abandonment presentation lays out the why and how. This is nothing more than the application of the Trivium, which is why--despite the whackado--his message resonates so strongly to those who have not gotten up to speed on what's really going on out here. If you're not one to agree with the whackado elements, then take them as mythology; that does not a damn thing to dilute the truth of the message, as myth is NOT a lie- it's a STORY. (Thanks to Joseph Campbell for making that clear.) Stories are how Mankind originally, and to this day, organizes and disseminates what he knows to others- especially to generations yet unborn. We dismiss them at our peril, and we have dismissed them for far too long as it is; as myth, as literature, or as misunderstood history it DOES NOT CHANGE THE MESSAGE.
Let's review the key points.
Naturally, there are further lies meant to dissuade resistance. Passio attacked the most popular ones out of the New Age Movement last year, in one hell of a podcast lasting eight hours. However, that came after a much shorter presentation lasting a mere 90 minutes, which I'm embedding below, and you're going to make yourself better for watching it and learning from it.
The reason that I posted those videos is because Passio laid out a foundation for a free, independent, and practical alternative to our current paradigm of slavery to and consumption by Empire. It is an individualist paradigm, not a collectivist one. It eschews the Pythonesque infighting amongst various cliques of Anarchism as being, quite frankly, useless bullshit. Sure, you've got Ancient Aliens and lots of other whackado to go with it, but what do you expect from a self-admitted former Satanist? The whackado is not the point; the point is the emphasis on Natural Law, our relationship to it, and how returning to a strict adherence of it will lead to Empire's fall- and with it, the healing of Mankind's long-running dysfunction.
In the Natural Law seminar Passio lays out the who, what, when, and where of What On Earth Is Happening. The Cosmic Abandonment presentation lays out the why and how. This is nothing more than the application of the Trivium, which is why--despite the whackado--his message resonates so strongly to those who have not gotten up to speed on what's really going on out here. If you're not one to agree with the whackado elements, then take them as mythology; that does not a damn thing to dilute the truth of the message, as myth is NOT a lie- it's a STORY. (Thanks to Joseph Campbell for making that clear.) Stories are how Mankind originally, and to this day, organizes and disseminates what he knows to others- especially to generations yet unborn. We dismiss them at our peril, and we have dismissed them for far too long as it is; as myth, as literature, or as misunderstood history it DOES NOT CHANGE THE MESSAGE.
Let's review the key points.
- There is no such thing as "authority"; it is a cult, intended to shackle your mind and keep you enslaved. No man is the master of any other man, and no man is the slave to any other man. There are no masters, and there are no slaves, so all claims of being either one or the other is a fraud. It doesn't matter what titles the claimant uses, or what ink-blotted pages they wave in your face, or what costume they wear- they're nothing more than gangsters because they have to wield weapons and threaten to violate you to enforce their claims. The only true law is Natural Law, so fuck everything else.
- There is no such thing as "money"; it is also a cult, with the same aim. Nothing used as currency has intrinsic value, for the reasons Passio lays out in the Cosmic Abandonment presentation. (If you can't eat it or use it as a tool, it has no intrinsic value; its value is strictly fiat and therefore can and will collapse once that belief collapses. Stop stacking silver and gold, and start stacking things you can actually use; neither of those will save your ass in an economic collapse or similar scenario.)
- Mankind is in this shit with Empire (the gods of the ancient world, in this case) because Empire, in the distant past, arose amongst us and attempted to use us to fulfill its rapacious demand for material wealth--gold, as the legends say--and didn't want to do the work on its own behalf to get it. This is the origin of slavery in Man's existence.
- Rather than outright genocide, Empire selected specific individuals susceptible to its lies and made them kings and priests over the rest of us; this, coupled with the emergence of money, marks the emergence of Man's original kingdoms and empires- pale reflections of Empire itself. This is the normalization of slavery, in a vast array of illusory and intersecting forms, in Man's experience.
- Until we break away from these cosmic frauds, we cannot achieve freedom and fulfill our promise in this life- both as individuals and as a species. This is a predatory threat, the ur-psychopath, and must be dealt with accordingly.
Naturally, there are further lies meant to dissuade resistance. Passio attacked the most popular ones out of the New Age Movement last year, in one hell of a podcast lasting eight hours. However, that came after a much shorter presentation lasting a mere 90 minutes, which I'm embedding below, and you're going to make yourself better for watching it and learning from it.
Friday, January 31, 2014
Mark Passio - Cosmic Abandonment
And now, the final part. This is the follow-up to the Natural Law Seminar that Passio mentioned at said seminar. Be warned: you're going through the Looking Glass to get from here to there, but I assure you that this is still a better explanation than ANY OTHER on offer. (Also, you're going to see Battlefield Earth, and the Clams, in a new--and even worse--light.)
This is what Passio says about his own video: "This is Mark Passio's presentation "Cosmic Abandonment - An Explanatory Synthesis Regarding Human Origins, Psychopathy, Slavery And The Current Psychological And Social Conditions Of Humanity" which was presented in Philadelphia, PA on December 12, 2013 as part of the Philadelphia UFO Meetup Group hosted by Chris Augustin. Filmed and edited by John King.
In this two-hour presentation, Mark links ancient accounts of extraterrestrial visitation to our planet with the manifestation of the psychological conditions in which the human species currently finds itself. Questions explored include: Were we actually created by non-human entities as a hybrid slave species? Did our extraterrestrial "parents" inadvertently create a slew of genetic anomalies in the human species, including primary psychopathy, as a result of their imprecise genetic modifications? Did our extraterrestrial forbearers provide to us our systems of government, money, and religion; and to what ends did they do so? What effect did our "cosmic parents" sudden disappearance have upon the collective human psyche? What does humanity need to understand to rectify the deeply-seated psychological trauma that it has amassed over eons, as a direct result of our troubled origins?"
Told you.
This is what Passio says about his own video: "This is Mark Passio's presentation "Cosmic Abandonment - An Explanatory Synthesis Regarding Human Origins, Psychopathy, Slavery And The Current Psychological And Social Conditions Of Humanity" which was presented in Philadelphia, PA on December 12, 2013 as part of the Philadelphia UFO Meetup Group hosted by Chris Augustin. Filmed and edited by John King.
In this two-hour presentation, Mark links ancient accounts of extraterrestrial visitation to our planet with the manifestation of the psychological conditions in which the human species currently finds itself. Questions explored include: Were we actually created by non-human entities as a hybrid slave species? Did our extraterrestrial "parents" inadvertently create a slew of genetic anomalies in the human species, including primary psychopathy, as a result of their imprecise genetic modifications? Did our extraterrestrial forbearers provide to us our systems of government, money, and religion; and to what ends did they do so? What effect did our "cosmic parents" sudden disappearance have upon the collective human psyche? What does humanity need to understand to rectify the deeply-seated psychological trauma that it has amassed over eons, as a direct result of our troubled origins?"
Told you.
Thursday, January 30, 2014
Mark Passio's Natural Law Seminar / Natural Law the REAL Law of Attraction 3 of 3 (evening)
This is the evening, and final, session of Passio's Natural Law seminar.
Wednesday, January 29, 2014
Mark Passio's Natural Law Seminar / Natural Law the REAL Law of Attraction 2 of 3 (afternoon)
This is the afternoon session for Passio's Natural Law Seminar.
Tuesday, January 28, 2014
Mark Passio's Natural Law Seminar / Natural Law the REAL Law of Attraction 1 of 3 (morning)
This is the first of three parts for Passio's Natural Law seminar, covering the morning session.
Monday, January 27, 2014
"Pattern Recognition Time" by Arthur Capozzi (Natural Law Seminar Introductory Presentation)
This week, all week, I'm posting the videos for Mark Passio's Natural Law Seminar. These are from the Tragedy & Hope YT Channel. Then, on Friday, I'm going to post Passio's follow-up Cosmic Abandonment presentation. (All this in addition to things like New World Next Week, Buzzsaw, etc. that are both relevant and timely.)
This is T&H's description: "On October 19th, 2013 Mark Passio presented his seminar "Natural Law: The REAL Law of Attraction" at the Yale Omni, organized by Arthur Capozzi & Christopher Capozzi, and produced for distribution by Tragedy and Hope dot com. This is the introductory talk as offered by Arthur Capozzi, which will be followed in this playlist by the 3 parts (morning, afternoon, and evening) of Mark's seminar."
This is T&H's description: "On October 19th, 2013 Mark Passio presented his seminar "Natural Law: The REAL Law of Attraction" at the Yale Omni, organized by Arthur Capozzi & Christopher Capozzi, and produced for distribution by Tragedy and Hope dot com. This is the introductory talk as offered by Arthur Capozzi, which will be followed in this playlist by the 3 parts (morning, afternoon, and evening) of Mark's seminar."
Wednesday, January 1, 2014
Welcome to 2014! Larken Rose Wants YOU to be Free, in Heart and Mind
Here's what Rose says about the video below: "In between all the philosophizing going, it's worth mentioning some very encouraging things happening on a more instinctive, gut level, in a whole lot of people. There are lots of emotional sparks out there who just need a little intellectual fuel to become beacons of true freedom."
Wednesday, December 25, 2013
Merry Christmas! I Give You NINE HOURS AND MORE of Mark Passio
The nice people at Tragedy & Hope put up Mark Passio's massive all-day seminar on Natural Law and the Law of Attraction. I'm embedding all of those videos here because you really need to watch this shit, and yes that includes the other guy--Arthur Capozzi--doing the introduction. Merry Christmas, folks.
Sunday, December 22, 2013
The Crossroads of Technological Unemployment
I think that we've hit a breakpoint this year. Specifically, I think we've passed a critical point in the automation of the world's economy, and now the end-result of technological unemployment is inevitable. Within the next 15 years more and more jobs will be eliminated entirely as machines and software prove themselves superior to human labor in all of the ways that matter to the owners, and with it comes a problem that has to be addressed if we are to benefit from these technological innovations. Let me elaborate on this issue.
Right now, our global paradigm requires that each individual somehow acquire an arbitrarily-determined amount of currency--paper or digits, really--to pay to stay alive. We do this through occupying various positions of employment, and most of us occupy positions whose compensation does not match the time and effort demanded of us; we are the ones who will soon be permanently unemployed because robots and software will make our positions irrelevant as well as too costly to retain. For those of us not immanently threatened, we will instead be degraded in prestige (and thus payment) through first de-skilling the position's duties and then automating away entirely; add 5-15 years to your obsolescence as a worker if you're a professional or tradesman, depending upon how much creativity or social interaction is required. If we lack employment, and we don't already have a commanding position of investable wealth to work for us, then we soon find our place tenuous and we slip out of acceptability and find ourselves marginalized.
The technological unemployment now occurring means that there will be fewer and fewer jobs, as well as fewer and fewer replacements, so that more people are permanently thrown out of the job market. They can't retrain faster than the would-be jobs are taken out through a new robot or software suite, so the remaining position that pay well will be those positions that require qualities that only Mankind possesses. Everything else will be done by a robot or by software. As we are soon to reach a tipping point where our economic paradigm no longer functions due to the unemployed population becoming far too large to handle, there is a choice that must be made for Mankind to continue.
Empire and its Thralls want to take this crisis point to cull the population, reduce it by a number so great--80-90%--that it freaks out the minds of many who confront the scenario before them. To make this happen, they want to weaponize the drones and automate the military and security services such that the Praetorian Guard flaw ceases to exist; they want the ability to give unquestioned orders to commit genocide upon any population that proves to be at all troublesome no matter the cause for discontent. In short, they want to BE Skynet and have unbeatable hordes of Hunter-Killer Terminators at hand to deal with those populations that do not succumb to the other measures that they want to use--and are now using--to slowly (in terms of decades or generations) make the same goal come about.
What Empire and its Thralls are now aware of as a threat is that enough individuals, around the gloves, now exist and are now communicating across the globe all that they know. Flaws are now corrected at rates heretofore unthinkable. Axioms in this wretched paradigm have been examined, and are now being used against the Thralls; we don't have to pay to be alive on this planet and a growing mass of the global population is aware that practical ways to make technological unemployment truly beneficial to Mankind are possible. Right now, the Swedes are due to vote on a national referendum to implement a Basic Income Guarantee of $2800/month (to use U.S. Dollars) and you don't have to do a god-damned thing to get it. This is in addition to any income you get from a job, and by itself is more than sufficient to keep you fed, clothed and housed at a respectable level; it takes away the existential threat to one's life, allowing you to pursue your passions and actually enjoy being alive instead of slaving away for the benefit of others.
Right now, it's a race between the would-be genocidal elite and the resistance that wants to liberate Mankind from the millenia of shit work that kills the spirit and ruins the lives of the vast majority of Mankind. If you want to see the better tomorrow, then participate in the monkeywrenching of the drone-enforced police state and support measures that wreck the paradigm entirely like Basic Income.
Right now, our global paradigm requires that each individual somehow acquire an arbitrarily-determined amount of currency--paper or digits, really--to pay to stay alive. We do this through occupying various positions of employment, and most of us occupy positions whose compensation does not match the time and effort demanded of us; we are the ones who will soon be permanently unemployed because robots and software will make our positions irrelevant as well as too costly to retain. For those of us not immanently threatened, we will instead be degraded in prestige (and thus payment) through first de-skilling the position's duties and then automating away entirely; add 5-15 years to your obsolescence as a worker if you're a professional or tradesman, depending upon how much creativity or social interaction is required. If we lack employment, and we don't already have a commanding position of investable wealth to work for us, then we soon find our place tenuous and we slip out of acceptability and find ourselves marginalized.
The technological unemployment now occurring means that there will be fewer and fewer jobs, as well as fewer and fewer replacements, so that more people are permanently thrown out of the job market. They can't retrain faster than the would-be jobs are taken out through a new robot or software suite, so the remaining position that pay well will be those positions that require qualities that only Mankind possesses. Everything else will be done by a robot or by software. As we are soon to reach a tipping point where our economic paradigm no longer functions due to the unemployed population becoming far too large to handle, there is a choice that must be made for Mankind to continue.
Empire and its Thralls want to take this crisis point to cull the population, reduce it by a number so great--80-90%--that it freaks out the minds of many who confront the scenario before them. To make this happen, they want to weaponize the drones and automate the military and security services such that the Praetorian Guard flaw ceases to exist; they want the ability to give unquestioned orders to commit genocide upon any population that proves to be at all troublesome no matter the cause for discontent. In short, they want to BE Skynet and have unbeatable hordes of Hunter-Killer Terminators at hand to deal with those populations that do not succumb to the other measures that they want to use--and are now using--to slowly (in terms of decades or generations) make the same goal come about.
What Empire and its Thralls are now aware of as a threat is that enough individuals, around the gloves, now exist and are now communicating across the globe all that they know. Flaws are now corrected at rates heretofore unthinkable. Axioms in this wretched paradigm have been examined, and are now being used against the Thralls; we don't have to pay to be alive on this planet and a growing mass of the global population is aware that practical ways to make technological unemployment truly beneficial to Mankind are possible. Right now, the Swedes are due to vote on a national referendum to implement a Basic Income Guarantee of $2800/month (to use U.S. Dollars) and you don't have to do a god-damned thing to get it. This is in addition to any income you get from a job, and by itself is more than sufficient to keep you fed, clothed and housed at a respectable level; it takes away the existential threat to one's life, allowing you to pursue your passions and actually enjoy being alive instead of slaving away for the benefit of others.
Right now, it's a race between the would-be genocidal elite and the resistance that wants to liberate Mankind from the millenia of shit work that kills the spirit and ruins the lives of the vast majority of Mankind. If you want to see the better tomorrow, then participate in the monkeywrenching of the drone-enforced police state and support measures that wreck the paradigm entirely like Basic Income.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)