Citizens in Officer's Shoes

In light of the recent travesties circulating in the media regarding the Ferguson, MO case, and after heavy amounts of consideration as to the response (if any) Divine America would take; I thought it necessary to clarify the position and ideas supported here. In particular, and as a multi-topic blog, clarification needed to be made as to the awareness of and position on law enforcement officers (LEO), human rights, and the rise of the police state, and how it could potentially be fixed—for lack of a better word.

As more lights are shined on incidents involving people being shot by police, it may often appear that there is only a negative perspective held against officers of the state. People have themselves convinced that EVERY person in a leading seat and every LEO behind the badge is corrupt.

Clearly, this is not the case. Just as in any other group or society, there are good and bad people. As the author here, I can tell you that any time there is an opportunity to shine a positive light on individuals in these positions, I want to share it. Because there actually are some very honorable, committed, and compassionate heroes among them. While I do this personally, the site may have been neglected to express these ideas. That sort of news does not travel far in our world of drama and hate-lovers. If you have those stories, drop them on us! J

Divine’s purpose is to expose those who pervert and abuse the authorities entrusted unto them; see them held accountable for their actions; and replaced with individuals who have read, understand, and believe in the constitution.

It is unfortunate at times that even we collectivize the entire organization (even across the globe) that is the police force. We do have the clear understanding for the “good-cop” “bad-cop” distinctions, but on the other hand, there’s many among those “good-cops” who are “guilty” of silence. They allow the perversion of their unit by maintaining a code of silence to protect these “bad-cops” or their jobs.

Which brings us to that.

This is a job to some. Think about that. What is a job to you? It’s something I have to do to support my family and lifestyle. Right? I may enjoy it, I may not, but I definitely need to keep it—especially in this economy.

Here’s what “I’m just doing my job” means:

I did not become an officer because I believe in the constitution, and I don’t have passion for what the original job entailed.

Simply put, if you didn’t join the ranks of an officer to serve and protect people, then being an officer probably isn’t the right “job” for you. Don’t get me wrong, I appreciate all who step up to take the position, but it’s a difficult job. It’s made more difficult by the unconstitutional things officers are forced to do when they’re just doing their “job.” No one denies that. But, it requires mental and physical fortitude, sometimes beyond imaginable to the average person. More importantly, it requires compassion for the people you’re supposed to be protecting and serving.

During the Ferguson situation (which I didn’t want to weigh in on, but I see that I had to), we heard officers refer to people as “animals.” Agree or not, police were meant to serve and protect. With that polluted mentality and perception of people, it’s likely that officer approaches all situations similarly: negatively.

Believe it or not, those thoughts really do create vibrations that are received by frequencies many aren’t even aware they’re receptive to. When these vibrations are picked up by the receiver, situations are escalated. It’s a contributive of such things as PTSD. But we can talk about that another time.

It’s also relative to why the local military formerly known as police suddenly went from being protective servants of the people to being law enforcers of the state. Somewhere along the road people stopped being

responsible for the protecting of their own communities and human rights. At some point, we decided we decided we could pay someone else to do the dirty job of cleaning up our streets, and guaranteeing our personal safety. All we had to do was comply with the very laws we demanded to “protect” people from themselves and others. The rest of us could rest easy because we now had employees on the job.

But then it became necessary to implement all kinds of rules, and slowly our rights started dwindling away.

Now, the badge has become synonymous with being a member of the largest association of organized crime. We have LEOs that violate their oath, engage in crime, and allow themselves to be used as the Federal Reserve’s personal army.

Unfortunately, as more stories of police brutality rise, so does the occasions of non-compliance. And many don’t end well for either side.

But in most cases, the police are provided the advantage of military weapons and vehicles; presumably because our streets are so overrun with soldiers and warfare.

Right. I’m not convinced that these things are necessary for service and protection. Oh wait! That’s right, there’s that pesky “war on drugs” being fought in nearly every city in the world, right? Sometimes at the wrong house, but that’s neither here nor there, because officers are now equipped for that war and ANY others that may arise.

You know, like the riots that went on in Ferguson while police were busy gassing reporters and legitimate protestors. Interesting strategy, but we’ll just say that whole situation is a mess that was sensationalized, and made all involved and participating look like a bunch of jackasses (and that’s being polite). Sadly, it’s still going on.

We are literally watching the roll out of their master plan for when the liberty movement ever decides to unite on a common ground. “Laws” will be enforced by officers in battle rattle and rolling with MRAPs, ARs, and a variety of explosive devices, because in the end they have a job to do. It’s the job we the people paid them

to do because we didn’t want the responsibility of doing it ourselves. We  want them to do it. To save us from the “bad-guy.” Even if it means we may be mistaken for the bad guy. Right?

No, Divine America is not anti-police. But she is for community involvement, policing the police, and seeing better training being given to those who are supposed to be serving and protecting. 

Abnormal Norms Among Police: The Blue Code of Silence

Morals and ethics exist in us all. However, the influence of these morals and ethics may be based upon religious beliefs, law, common sense, culture, or the personal opinions of others. This variety of influence is what leads to the rise of ethical relativism: a theory which indicates that the rules of morals and ethics are virtually undefined. Instead, the concepts of ethical relativism reason that the variances of morals from culture to culture and person to person are based on the majority rule and what is considered to be normal within the society.

We've talked about this before in terms of mob rule laws and personal responsibility. To further demonstrate this theory in terms that may matter more to this audience, I will use the current corrupted state of affairs among police officers.

A few stories have already been highlighted by Divine America with regards to the unjust privileges bestowed upon those who wear the badge. At this time, the idea of law enforcement is synonymous with corruption. More and more, we are witnessing not singular acts by individual police, but a trend in the job description whereby the majority of all officers are either guilty of the action, or guilty of inaction. Quite surprisingly, police corruption is wide spread- not  only through America - but among foreign nations as well. It goes without saying that the majority of civilian people expect corruption of all sorts from authority figures.

While this is the norm for police officials in many foreign nations, I would point out that so is civilian brutality of the police. Yea, in other countries, people police their police. Some countries. Not all. See for yourself.

Police departments of America have a subculture of their own in which a secret code known as the Blue Code of Silence defines the normalcy of this renegade behavior. The Blue Code of Silence is the unwritten rule among police that prohibits officers from reporting the wrong doings of fellow officers. This code forgives an officer’s looking the other way while behavior unbecoming of a police officer is conducted (Meade, 2011). 

Arguably, the “Blue Shield,” to which it is also commonly referred, was secretly designed to allow officers to carry out “justice” without risk. In most cases, officers would knowingly support false testimony, induce false confessions, or cover up brutality in order to convict known felons, convey the appearance of justice, or avoid demerit (Raab, 1993).  While this apparently typical behavior is not one in which the civilian public may agree with, it is certainly proven to be the accepted behavior among a multitude of police departments across America. In fact, several police chiefs across the nation have been found guilty of hiring officers based on the likeliness of their condoning and partaking in this behavior (Raab, 1993).

Depending on who you ask, the idea of the normality of this immoral act is one which is both encouraged and chastised. Those who accept this behavior as normal and acceptable are generally those who expect justice at any cost. In fact, these people would rather see someone punished for a crime over no one. In most cases, these people may not care for the truth in the case so much as they care for the appearance of a solved case. After all, a solved crime means fewer criminals on the street. These are the very people who will argue that the police have a difficult job.

Well, people don't like being extorted. Imagine, if police didn't extort people, how much easier their job would be. Imagine, if police actually "served" and "protected" instead of just enforced the [unconstitutional] laws, how much less dangerous their job would be. So yes, their job is dangerous, but it doesn't have to be as dangerous as it is.

Others feel as though police officers should exemplify the most moral, ethical, and integral people of a society; in which case, the waiving of their integrity is shameful no matter what it accomplishes (Ezeikiel, 2007). Interestingly enough, these officers are intended to be servants of the people - essentially hired for the people by....not the people? I don't know about you, but I've never had the opportunity to interview any of the officers that sought a position protecting me. Perhaps we the people should be part of that. It would give us the opportunity to inquire exactly how the individual intends to uphold the constitution.

But, that's all responsibility. And when we fail to take it, we get officers with mindsets, like this fine upstanding and protected officer of law, who thinks people mad over a murder makes them the animals. And I digress. Sorry. 

Unfortunately, more and more we are seeing the Blue Code of Silence used to protect officers while taking part in crimes that are only a means of benefit to themselves. Without a doubt, there is a certain heightened ability to “get away” with crime when you are on the staff of those who are intended to "war against" crime. When police officers use their authoritative position to engage in drug deals and protection scandals there ceases to be any appearances of justice (Ezeikiel, 2007).

Because the nature of their corruption can put "bad guys" where they belong and be used to satisfy personal gains, corruption in police officers can be viewed as bad and good. There is no simple good or bad answer, which is the same idea behind ethical relativism: what is moral to some is immoral to others (Rosenstand, 2011). The fortunate knowledge in this case is that the majority will always believe that corruption in police is unacceptable. However, when the corrupt behavior serves its intended purpose of locking up bad guys, it is more readily accepted or overlooked even by the majority society.

In America, ethical relativism makes great impacts on law, voting, education, and much more within a community. For instance, since the inception of the United States people from various countries have flocked here. With them they brought many things, but more importantly, brought their cultural morals. For this reason, America has had to establish a standard of ethical living, and in most cases, a law to protect the majority opinion of morals and ethics.

 For example, in cultures outside of America, the act of honor-killing is perceived as the right of a family to kill another family member who has brought dishonor to the family (Shingledecker, 2012). There exists today a large amount of stories in American news like the one of Noor al-Maleki, whose father ran her down in his jeep, killing her as a means of restoring honor to his family. Though this behavior was acceptable to his Muslim community, it was not acceptable by American cultural standard, and Faleh al-Maleki, father of the victim was sentenced to life in prison (Labi, 2011).

However, as we see more and more foreign movement to America, these very standards are being threatened. I would say this is a digression of our topic, but seeing as how those with a badge are already getting away with such crimes, I wonder how truly close we are to the society controlled entirely by vicious killers with the manpower (and artillery) to accomplish their mission.

Unfortunately, ethical relativism still demands that people formulate a side of moral standards to which they should adhere. I think most of this audience would agree that officers of the state at all levels should be held accountable for their actions, just as any citizen would. After all, not even someone wearing a badge is above the law.

Sites such as PoliceWatch.us and CopBlock on Facebook, are designed to bring attention to the corrupt activities of police; but are quickly shut down and what information they put out still provides no means of preventing the behavior.

In order to stop the rise of the police state, the citizens must take action to get these officers in line. It is our duty to remind them what taking an oath is about. Acting in a legally protected manner to bring attention to the inappropriate conduct of law enforcement officers, the people can bring justice where it needs to be placed - even if that means arresting an officer of the law. When we stop turning a blind eye to the problems, they might actually get fixed, and our nation is in great need of repair these days.

The ideas of ethical relativism provide an easy excuse for people to ignore moral issues that may not immediately affect them. In America, we may ignore immoral actions if they do not break the law, or if they do not directly involve ourselves. Ethical relativism is not a solution to limiting or preventing unethical behavior. It is a validation for turning a blind eye to behavior that is considered inappropriate by those who have slightly more integrity. However, silence is just an unforgiving. As long as officers of the law are responsible for policing their own actions, and protected by the shield, they will remain the largest known organization of crime; and we the people will continue to be extorted for whatever reasons they deem worthy.

"Whatcha gonna do when they come for you?" Will you say, "No, thank you," and risk life and limb for what you believe in? Or, will you uphold the traditions of servitude?

Ezeikiel. (2007). The Fraternity that is "The Blue Wall." Police Watch. Retrieved from http://policewatch.us/system/page.php?id=331

Labi, N. (2011). An American Honor Killing: One Victim's Story. Time US. Retrieved from http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,2055445,00.html

Meade, T. (2011). NYPD’s “Blue Code of Silence” Screams Injustice & Prejudice. HBC Buzz. Retrieved from http://hbcubuzz.com/nypds-blue-code-of-silence-screams-injustice-prejudice/

Raab, S. (1993). The Dark Blue Code of Silence. The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/books/98/02/08/home/15700.html

Rosenstand, N. (2011). The Moral of the Story. San Diego Mesa College. The McGraw Hill Companies

Mark of the Beast

Never short of attacks on the liberties of the free being, the worst of these offenses include the ones that most people not only comply with, but defend. In addition to defending these suppressions of freedom, we – collectively – support the institution of organized crime that perpetrates crimes of racketeering and extortion on the people of a community. We push the responsibility of enforcing the censorship of our rights onto this group; we expect to be extorted by them if we don’t comply; and we expect others to comply, because we have as individuals.

We call this organization law enforcement.

In most cases, we trust they are doing stellar work providing –as they say- service and protection throughout their turf. After all, they are catching “bad guys,” fighting a war on drugs, saving cats from trees, and walking old ladies across the street, right? Veiled by a shield of secrecy, we easily turn a blind eye to the instances when our employees are not completing their job to our satisfaction; even if it means an “innocent” life is lost.

For most people, the situation does not affect them personally, so there’s no invested interest. In other situations, though, the hope for freedom is lost on the compliance mindset—a relatively childish and quite honestly, sheepish and passive way of going through life, in which one believes “if I must comply, so must you.” Sadly, on account of such thinking, on such a massive scale, we find ourselves held by the henchmen of the state by the ankles, or the shackles.

For many, though, this mindset is not chosen, but elected for us at birth by our parents. Essentially selling our children to the government most parents indoctrinate their children over the years and ingrain the details of the child’s contract with the state. Until an age when children are identified as being able to assume the full responsibility of their contract, the society impresses the rules and extortions to which they are expected to adhere.

This contract established between your parents and the government might not appear so obvious at first, but it is the mark of a beast that was bestowed upon most at birth. With this mark, you can enjoy limited liberties, so long as you are not found in violation of rules. You can go to school, get a job, get other permission slips, get married, and receive all kinds of different perks and benefits. However, this mark also means, you will pay when we tell you to pay. And if you can’t pay, we’ll attach it to your name and number in such a way that you will never be completely free of what you “owe” simply for existing. By the way…you will comply, or else.

If you haven’t figured it out yet, I’m talking about the identifying data that is provided to you at birth – a social security card, a birth certificate… a soon-to-be RFID chip, or maybe a barcode. You do not have to have these things by your natural born right; you need them however, if you wish to enjoy any liberty in this country.

Or else, right?

What happens when we say “no, thank you,” to this contract? Somewhere along the road people stopped taking personal responsibility from upholding sovereignty of the being. They complied with an idea that they needed to exchange freedom for a name and number that provided “permission” to pursue life, liberty, and happiness.

Of course, who could blame folks for complying. The native and pagans all knew and taught about the power of the name. Even the bible refers to the identification of beings as giving power over oneself. However, when met with the “or else” portion of that comply demand, it seemed rather sensible to just go with it.

Take this story for instance, which takes place just outside of Atlanta this past June. A dear friend was travelling home in a vehicle that he failed to provide the permission slips for (driving without a tag). Hot on his trail were the goons of the beast ready to extort him for his “crime.”

My dear friend - not being a “bad guy”- pulled over and awaited the officer. With all cordiality extended to the officer, my friend declined to present his driver’s license on the argument that he was not driving, merely travelling. After a short debate of the right to travel and the need for permission to do so, the officer resorted to the infamous “I have a badge, so you’ll do what I say” rattle to encourage my dear friend to obey.

After requesting numerous times to be allowed to continue his travel, and defending his right to do so without the permission slips; the officer trespassed through the vehicle’s window, unlocked the door, and pursued to forcefully drag my dear friend from the safety of his car. He was chained at the wrists, and kidnapped to a fortified facility for days, where he was further subjected to various tortures until he complied with their requests for his marks.

While I painted an extreme picture for you, do not doubt for one second the reality of these truths. We employed these individuals to serve and protect. But who are they really serving and protecting if this is their response to not having your permission slips? The report indicates the state is a victim. But I ask you this: was the harm caused to any being? Is the state truly a being that can be victimized? And if it is… is failure to obtain your permission slip for something you have the right to do a victimization of the state?

If you don’t think this is insane; if you somehow feel safer because my dear friend was locked up for not having paper; if you think I’m lying…. Try it. Try driving down the street with no tag. Try saying “no, thank you” when the henchmen come for your papers. Just a fair warning, you may get hurt. You may get a taser pointed at your face, or worse a gun. They may break into your vehicle and drag you out. You may be kidnapped and placed in a cage. You could even die.  Short of being killed, all of those injustices were suffered by my dear friend all because he failed to comply with the details of his contracting marks.

More than ever it’s time to recognize our failure to take personal responsibility for our sovereignty – not as citizens of the USA, but as beings of this planet; with inalienable rights bestowed upon us by our creator, NOT by some organization. It’s time to tear the contracts, and remove the barcode of identity and compliance tattooed on the fictitious documents provided to us by our rulers.

Are you your marks? Do you identify with the marks bestowed upon you by the beast that is our government? Or do you say, “NO, THANK YOU!”

___________________________________________________

“What if vast numbers of people say ‘well we’re not doing it’? They’d have no power whatsoever. Their power comes in our acquiescence. What we need isn’t compliance, what we need is a global non-comply-dance. [They] cannot grant our freedom, nor can [they] take it away.” – David Icke

Will Blue "Help" You?

To those of you following the Roots of Damnation series, please forgive my interrupting the thread; however, I did recently receive notification of something that required immediate attention. As lovers of liberty, I knew there'd be no better audience to help me get the message out there, that ENOUGH IS ENOUGH.

It's unfortunate that I have to admit that it takes people being personally affected before they will do ANYTHING.  Perhaps that's why this took precedence over the series. Because this time, the violation of liberty came too close to home.

As a contributor to other sites, and a believer in the mission of unity across the nation, I often find myself working with teams of people. The people become like family - open to the ugly things about one another without the harsh criticism because some cosmic  or blood-like bond shared. How would you feel if the members of your team or the extension of their ACTUAL family came under attack from the very things you speak against?

Here's the story. Read it, cause from here out, I'm assuming you did. ;)

The woman in the story happens to be a team member's cousin. Poetic isn't it? Now, that wasn't the only reason for my involvement in this case. Previously, the team and I put Henry County PD under the spotlight for pulling firearms on little boys for building tree houses. It seemed it was time to look deeper into the department.

 Here's the media release Henry County Police Department released in regards to this case

As a member of The Fight for Freedom Never Sleeps team, this was looking to be another mission for Operation Simple Request (OSR). Further research was conducted to determine the validity of the situation. 

Per the instructions of OSR, evidence was obtained that painted a clearer picture--not only of what's going on in Henry County, but the state of affairs across the nation. 

Listen closely to the calls for help Lori Knowles makes to the only people she KNOWS can be there in minutes to HELP her. 

Henry County Police Department identified the call of Lori Knowles as a "911 Hang Up - Unknown Trouble." After multiple failed attempts to communicate her request for help for a possible overdose of medication, the dispatcher assumes the problem and reason for the call.
In less than an hour, Henry County Police Officers would forcefully enter the home of Lori Knowles, determine her as the threat, and open fire on the woman; ultimately leading to her death. 

I can clearly hear the woman beg for help in the first call, but let's see how her second attempt went.

In this second call to police, Lori Knowles can again be clearly heard as she states her condition of being overdosed on a medication. This dispatcher attempts to calm Lori in order to discover the root of her call. In a defeated breath, Lori once again indicates a medical problem before being disconnected. 

I'm not going to tell you what to believe. No one can do that. But I will tell you this: the "HELP" for Lori, indicates the situation started at 4:11 pm. After a 15 minute ride to the hospital (20minutes for the average person, but we're assuming she had an ambulance), she was pronounced dead at 5:27pm.

What this means is that people are liabilities. Police don't have time to spend more than an hour with you, before deciding, you're expendable. The dispatch certainly didn't aid by interrupting the woman - but I'm not the expert in communicating with overdose patients, so maybe that IS just the way it's done.

But as if that were not enough, get ready for the real tear jerker. Listen as Mr. Knowles makes an attempt to COMMUNICATE with officers.

Listen as dispatch prepares to handle the arrival of  Lori's husband on the scene where his wife is attacked by officers. Listen as he begs dispatch to tell officers not to hurt his wife, all the while wondering if it's too late. 

Why does this matter to you? Like I said before, these are NO LONGER isolated incidents. These crimes against humanity, against the OATH TAKEN BY OFFICERS, has gone on far too long. There's a growing list of people who've been assaulted by "officers of the LAW" in the name of SERVICE and PROTECTION. 

There is something that can be done to bring misconduct like this to an end, but it starts with policing the police. We - THE CITIZENS  of the state - can see to it that these officers be held accountable for their crimes in the same manner citizens are subjected; and we can see to it that justice be served to those who TRULY are servants to the people, and no more above the law than the citizens they claim to protect.

You can shine a spotlight on this crime and many others like it, being perpetrated by the state's mafia, by checking out Operation Simple Request on Facebook. In the meantime, don't forget to let Henry County PD know what you think about their service and protection by leaving a review here.