Friday, August 29, 2014

Beyond Michael Brown-: An Unbiased, Factual Report On Exactly What Happened

What may we have possibly overlooked? It goes far, far deeper than the atrocities inflicted upon Michael Brown. After digging deeper into the rabbit hole, the veil has been uplifted to revel nothing more than a manufactured depopulation agenda. Not only for blacks or for whites, but for every single human being being on the face of the planet, except the 0.1% of course.
Which Michael Brown do you see? The victim, or the criminal ? Or will you be able to see that this is much more than the story of a police stop that went horribly wrong ? Although I will discuss what happened this report is also about much more than the problem of crime in the black community, or even police brutality in the nation. This report is beyond that. It is about the systematic dismantling of ALL American’s rights. When you examine what I have to show you, you will be shocked to find out the fact which the establishment has been keeping from you until it was too late. The fact that your rights are gone.

Do you understand what I am saying ? Your rights are gone. Not just black people’s rights. Not just criminal’s rights. ALL American’s right’s are gone. Police have been given the right, by their corporate state masters to shoot you whenever they please, as long as they can justify it later by saying you were going to do something, solely in their mind. Not that they had evidence you broke a particular law, but merely a “reasonable” feeling.
Why don’t we begin by looking at what happened ?

11:48 AM:   Officer Darren Wilson responds to 911 call of a sick child.

11:51 AM: 911 call of a strong arm robbery ( allegedly Michael Brown and his friend ), at a local grocery store. Officer Wilson reportedly never heard about the robbery according to the original Police Report (Although the official police report now states that he DID hear about the robbery)
BETWEEN 12:01 PM and 2:00 PM Depending on different versions and witnesses.

The Slate reports:
Two competing narratives quickly emerged about the incident, one from police who say that the officer acted in self-defence and one from several witnesses who have said that Wilson was the aggressor. What both sides agree on is that Brown was unarmed at the time of the shooting. County prosecutors began presenting evidence to a grand jury 11 days later, but it will likely take months before jurors reach a decision on whether Wilson should be charged. If he ultimately is, many details of the official investigation could remain sealed until trial, making it likely that questions about what happened in the moments before Wilson opened fire will remain unanswered for the foreseeable future.

The best that I can put together from my research is something like the following scenario may have happened:

Michael Brown and his friend were walking down the street and officer Darren Brown told them to get off the street. Words were exchanged and perhaps the boys did not get on to the sidewalk in the manner he wanted, without radioing the call in or asking for back up officer Wilson attempted to drag Michael Brown into the police car. A struggle insured and officer Wilson fired his gun at Michael Brown. Most likely shooting him the first of 6 times.

At this time, while fighting for his life he appears to have struck officer Wilson, and fled the police car. Michael Brown attempted to run away, but officer Wilson ran after him, discharging his weapon as he was running, and striking Michael several more times. At no time does officer Wilson call in for back up, or to even report shots fired and subject fleeing.

Michael eventually stops and turns around, kneels on the ground and puts his hands up in the air. The universal sign of surrender. But instead of cuffing him at that point, officer Wilson fires into the head of Michael Brown.

Everything That Went Wrong In Ferguson:

Two weeks after police officer Darren Wilson shot and killed Michael Brown on a street in Ferguson, Missouri, many exact details of the fatal incident remain unknown. Much of what has happened since, however, has been documented in real time. Angered by both the shooting itself and a lack of answers from local authorities, residents took to the streets of the St. Louis suburb to protest. The police stoked those protests by brandishing military-grade equipment, sparking an aggressive response by some that in turn brought an even harsher crackdown from police. That cycle repeated itself on Slate’s Jamelle Bouie has already documented the root causes of the tension between Ferguson’s largely black community and its predominantly white police force. But what has been missing from the debate over the police response in Ferguson is a day-by-day accounting of the specific law enforcement actions that exacerbated that pre-existing tension.

To be fair, police officers have a difficult and thankless job, and the vast majority perform admirably. On some nights in Ferguson, there have been more than 100 officers—from a number of different departments—patrolling the protests, and many have done no wrong. That said, in the days since Brown was killed, there has been a pattern of official missteps and misconduct.

Here is my best attempt at the Ferguson timeline, with law enforcement behaviour that ranges from the rational to the possibly justified to the highly questionable to the downright unconstitutional.


Saturday, Aug. 9, early afternoon: A white Ferguson Police officer, later identified as Darren Wilson, shoots and kills Michael Brown, a black 18-year-old.

Two competing narratives quickly emerged about the incident, one from police who say that the officer acted in self-defence and one from several witnesses who have said that Wilson was the aggressor. What both sides agree on is that Brown was unarmed at the time of the shooting. County prosecutors began presenting evidence to a grand jury 11 days later, but it will likely take months before jurors reach a decision on whether Wilson should be charged. If he ultimately is, many details of the official investigation could remain sealed until trial, making it likely that questions about what happened in the moments before Wilson opened fire will remain unanswered for the foreseeable future.


Saturday, Aug. 9, early afternoon: Wilson allegedly does not alert dispatch to the shooting.

This detail remains unconfirmed. It stems from comments made by the attorney for Dorian Johnson, the friend who was with Brown during the confrontation with police. The lawyer complained to the Washington Post that in the immediate aftermath of the shooting the “officer doesn’t attempt to resuscitate [Brown]. … He does not call for medical help. The officer didn’t call it in that someone had been shot.” But, as Pundit Fact has explained, there is reason to doubt that claim. Incident reports later released by Ferguson police indicate a prompt response, and an audio recording from the St. Louis County dispatch also suggests that police requested assistance with crowd control in the area.

Saturday, Aug. 9, afternoon: Brown’s body remains at the scene of the shooting for several hours, a large portion of that time uncovered.

This grisly detail is undisputed. Ferguson Police Chief Thomas Jackson told reporters that one reason for the delay in processing the crime scene was that officers at the scene heard gunfire nearby (although those shots were never confirmed). Adding to the community’s anguish at seeing Brown’s body in the middle of the road was the fact that his mother, Lesley McSpadden, was at the scene pleading with police. “Why y’all got my son out in the street?” McSpadden told the officers, according to a neighbor who was present. Even Jackson would later admit that he was “uncomfortable” with how long Brown’s body remained in the open.

Sunday, Aug. 10, morning: Police provide only limited information about the shooting.

At a morning press conference, St. Louis County Police Chief Jon Belmar said the shooting was sparked by a physical confrontation instigated by Brown, and that Brown at one point reached for the officer’s gun. Belmar declined to provide further details or release the name of the officer. As for the number of times the unarmed teen was shot, Belmar offered up a sound bite that encapsulated what many saw as authorities’ cavalier attitude about Brown’s death. “It was more than just a couple, but I don’t think it was many more than that,” the chief said.


Sunday, Aug. 10: The police respond to growing protests with military-grade riot gear.

Ferguson residents gathered at the scene of Brown’s death on Saturday, and a smaller group of roughly 100 people rallied outside Ferguson police headquarters later that night. The demonstrations gained significant steam on Sunday night, with a growing number of residents congregating on West Florissant Avenue. While largely peaceful, the protests were not entirely so. A candlelight vigil was marred by violence as protesters smashed car windows and looted local businesses.

Fearing the worst about what was then still largely a peaceful demonstration, authorities responded by deploying officers in military-grade riot gear and armored trucks, quickly setting the tone for what would unfold over the following days. Radley Balko, who literally wrote the book on the militarization of American police, has already documented how dressing for battle increases the chances that you’ll engage in one. Several police chiefs have also expressed reservations about the gear in the past. “Some say not using it exposes my officers to a little bit more risk,” Chris Burbank, a police chief in Salt Lake City, told Balko last fall. “That could be, but risk is part of the job. I’m just convinced that when we don riot gear, it says ‘throw rocks and bottles at us.’ It invites confrontation. Two-way communication and cooperation are what’s important.”

Sunday, Aug. 10: Officers respond with rubber bullets and tear gas.

Local police, playing the part for which they are dressed, confronted protesters by firing rubber bullets and tear gas into the crowd. Dahlia Lithwick and Daria Roithmayr have already explained in Slate how such actions are unconstitutional. The due process clause of the Constitution bans officers from using excessive force even when they are attempting to control a crowd or arrest a suspect. “And tear gas is in a category all its own,” Lithwick and Roithmayr wrote. “Not only is unleashing it into a crowd an unconstitutional exercise of excessive force, but its use is banned by international law.”

Sunday, Aug. 10: Authorities dispatch officers with police dogs to help control the crowds.

Deploying tear gas and rubber bullets garnered the most attention, but the police made another highly questionable decision in attempting to control the crowds. Authorities also dispatched a number of officers with police dogs, a move that drew comparisons to how police used similar tactics during the Jim Crow era. As former Seattle Police Chief Norman Stamper, who was in charge during widespread protests in his city in 1999, later told Vox, “using dogs for crowd control is operationally, substantively, and from an image point-of-view just about the worst thing you can do.”

Sunday, Aug. 10: Officers use an LRAD sound cannon in an attempt to disperse the crowd.

A journalist live-streaming the demonstrations for Argus Radio captured the sound cannons, which blast pain-inducing noises over long distances, on film. The technology has previously sparked fears that it can cause permanent hearing loss, particularly if an officer isn’t properly trained in how to use it. “Human discomfort starts when a sound hits 120dB, well below the LRAD’s threshold,” Gizmodo explains. “Permanent hearing loss begins at 130dB, and if the device is turned up to 140dB, anyone within its path would not only suffer hearing loss, they could potentially lose their balance and be unable to move out of the path of the audio.”

Tuesday, Aug. 12: Police backtrack on releasing the name of the officer involved in the shooting.

Chief Jackson canceled plans to release the name of the officer who shot Brown, citing concerns for the safety of the officer and his colleagues. This decision further inflamed an already frustrated community, further fueling unrest among protesters who had been demanding answers (and getting none) for several days.

Tuesday, Aug. 12: The FAA bans low-flying aircraft over Ferguson.

The agency issued the temporary restrictions—which effectively barred news helicopters from the city's skies—at the request of local police, who claimed the ban was needed after one of its own choppers was shot at "multiple times on Sunday night," according to a spokesman.​ The ban was originally supposed to last one week but was extended for another seven days on Monday, Aug. 18, “to provide a safe environment for law enforcement activities," according to the FAA.

Wednesday, Aug. 13: Ferguson police officers reportedly remove their nametags and refuse to identify themselves when asked.

Huffington Post reporter Ryan Reilly was among the first to point out the lack of ID, a fact that was then confirmed by numerous photos. Some states require a police officer to identify him- or herself, but former St. Louis Police Chief Dan Isom, now a professor of criminal justice at the University of Missouri–St. Louis, told Slate that he was "not aware" of any law that required police in Missouri to wear identification or give their names if asked. Still, the seeming anonymity, and resulting unaccountability, of officers in Ferguson would become a running theme.

I have worked with inner city high school students. I’m 6 feet tall and quite a few of the young men were bigger than me. I can think of one young man who was well over 300 lbs and could be prone to violence. In fact I remember I once put myself between him and another boy who were about to fight, and I was able to talk him down, just by using my words. In fact, in 25 years of working with young people, I have never seen one that needed to be shot. Yet this rookie officer with just 4 years experience gets assigned alone in a high crime area. It was a disaster waiting to happen. You see, these young men may be as big as houses, but their minds are still teenagers. In most altercations an “adult” can reason with them. If however you stoop to their level, get loud, aggressive, or talk down to them, things can quickly go wrong, and physical violence become the result. I interviewed a former federal law enforcement officer who said: “There is always a less than lethal option, baton, pepper spray, taser etc. Police officers have it extra tough because they work alone most times, this is the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard and still speak out about it to this a day. With a job this dangerous, there should always be two officers assigned together. I ran a crew of 5 and when apprehending a suspect or having an altercation I always instructed my guys to have one draw their weapon (usually me) and one with less than lethal munitions or spray/taser. We are dealing with human beings, who we know nothing about. Drug addictions, mental problems etc-you don't know. That’s why you try to preserve life! Very rarely does a physical altercation with an unarmed suspect need to be grounds for deadly force. I was successful in force control , for example during Hurricane Katrina, in the biggest most dangerous wards in New Orleans, because I treated people, dope boys and all, with respect and like people. Most physical alterations CAN BE AVOIDED WITH YOUR MOUTH…

Each state, and municipality will vary some, but as you will see officers like the one above, are no longer receiving this type of training. The days of Mayberry and Andy Griffith are gone unfortunately. The system has been dismantled and replaced with a shoot first mentality. This was done on purpose, as I will show you, in order to bring in a police state to control the American people for the establishment’s goal of world government.

According to present Missouri law:

Law enforcement officer's use of force in making an arrest:

1. A law enforcement officer need not retreat or desist from efforts to effect the arrest, or from efforts to prevent the escape from custody, of a person he reasonably believes to have committed an offense because of resistance or threatened resistance of the arrestee. In addition to the use of physical force authorized under other sections of this chapter, he is, subject to the provisions of subsections 2 and 3, justified in the use of such physical force as he reasonably believes is immediately necessary to effect the arrest or to prevent the escape from custody.
2. The use of any physical force in making an arrest is not justified under this section unless the arrest is lawful or the law enforcement officer reasonably believes the arrest is lawful.
3. A law enforcement officer in effecting an arrest or in preventing an escape from custody is justified in using deadly force only
(1) When such is authorized under other sections of this chapter; or
(2) When he reasonably believes that such use of deadly force is immediately necessary to effect the arrest and also reasonably believes that the person to be arrested
(a) Has committed or attempted to commit a felony; or
(b) Is attempting to escape by use of a deadly weapon; or
(c) May otherwise endanger life or inflict serious physical injury unless arrested without delay.
4. The defendant shall have the burden of injecting the issue of justification under this section.

The roll out of the psychological operations that ensued, appears very familiar to me. The same forces that were behind the whole Zimmerman thing are back, both spiritually, and materially.

The money flowing to the shooter, the media campaign, and the victimization of the victim and his "background". It's the same script they are using, along with the usual inside manipulation of the justice system policies and procedures, and the editing of what gets put out on video and print.

And the same people will buy it.. and convince themselves the victim was guilty.. Zimmerman however, was just the beginning, and this is all to soften you to the idea that suspecting criminality is justification, and the same thing as evidence of criminality. And if it was just a white / black thing perhaps you might be able to take some solace if you are not black, but I am here to wake you to the fact that the police state is for EVERYONE.
You see they are not training just to fire on black people, or even just on people who are rioting.
Although that is who they will exercise it on first. They are training how to quell ANY protest, and how to lay siege to entire cities. We were told to be fearful of a Red Dawn, but all this time they have been preparing for a Blue Dawn (or in actuality a Black Dawn, since that is the color they like to dress their SWAT teams in).

An Isreali soldier warns that American soldiers are being sent to them, and trained by them to treat American citizens as Palestinian combatants:
If you don’t care about Palestinians… You guys should know: YOU are next in line. The next one who will die from a tear gas canister into his chest will be in Zucotti Park, will be in Denver, will be in Oakland, in San Francisco. It is happening here already. It is happening to different people, to people of color, to immigrants in this country, it is already happening. You guys are next in line.

The next one who will die from the brutality of the police will be YOUR son or daughter. Our army is training your police to see them as their enemy, because Palestinians are our enemy. When they come back YOU are their enemy…

- Eran Efrati – An Israeli Soldier’s Story:  

Army Manual On Civil Disturbances:

( from an article by Dave Hodges in D.C. Clothesline )

The new Army manual, known as ATP 3-39.33, provides discussion and techniques about civil disturbances and crowd control operations that occur in the continental United States (CONUS) and outside the continental United States (OCONUS).

This document, published earlier this year, promises to change the way the “authorities” deal with protesters, even peaceful ones. The consequences of ATP 39.33 could prove deadly for testers.

Further, the provisions of this Army manual could prove to be the end of the
First Amendment right to peaceably assemble.protesters. Further, the provisions of this Army manual could prove to be the end of the First Amendment right to peaceably assemble.

 The manual states that:

"Civil unrest may range from simple, nonviolent protests that address specific issues, to eventsthat turn into full-scale riots".

This section of the manual clearly states that protesting is a right protected by the Constitution. However, the authorities leave themselves an out to “legally” engage in lethal force toward protesters when the manual states that “peaceful protests can turn into full-scale riots” and field commanders have the right to make that determination. Subsequently, all protests, peaceful or not, need to be managed by the potential for violence. In other words, all protests are to be considered to be violent and handled accordingly. This certainly explains the violent manhandling of the media by the DHS controlled and militarized police in Ferguson, MO.

On the surface, the Posse Comitatus Act (18 USC 1385) act should prevent the Army from deploying the troops in the midst of a protest that is not on the scale of something like the 1992 LA Riots. 

However, the Army claims exemption from Posse Comitatus in the four following areas. A state requests federal military assistance. When ordinary enforcement means are unworkable. Domestic violence or conspiracy to hinder execution of State or Federal law. Upon request of the Secret Service, to assist in carrying out its statutory duties to protect government officials and major politicalcandidates from physical harm.
New US Army Manual Calls For Lethal Force Against Peaceful Protesters:

The phrase “unlawful obstructions or rebellion against the authority of the United States, use of the militia or Armed Forces is authorized” this permits the federal government from being demonstrated against. An act of demonstration, or the most benign demonstrations of civil disobedience gives the government the authority to take “deadly action” against the public .

In the manual, any disruption of federal law can be decisively dealt with by the federal government.
The phrase: "Conspiracy to hinder execution of State or Federal law, the use of the militia or Armed Forces is authorized" is a telling passage of this Army document. If 10 USC 333 is applied to the letter of the written Army policy, the protesters who recently objected to illegal aliens being deposited in Murietta, California, could be subject to deadly force. Further, the protesters in Ferguson could be subject to the use of lethal force as well. The manual is quite clear in its intent which is to eliminate the act of protesting from the American landscape. More disturbingly, the right to summarily execute peaceful protesters is contained in this Army manual due to the purposeful ambiguity of when it is appropriate to use deadly force against protesters. This Army manual is an example of hard core, in-your-face martial law befitting the most violent regimes in the history of the planet.
There is another message contained in the manual and that is the clear anticipation that the American people are going to feel the need to be protesting in earnest in the foreseeable future. What exactly are the American people going to feel compelled to protest that remains unspecified in this manual? Could it be resistance to mandatory Ebola vaccinations? Could we be looking at food riots in the future? Will it be a currency collapse that puts Americans in the street? Will America rise up and say no to the plans for World War III and the coming conscription of both potential military personnel and a civilian labor slave force as described under Executive Order 13603?

What I hope you take from this report is that we, the people, need to work together for each other, because the government, military, and financial interests are organizing against us, and stripping us of more and more rights. It is time to reign in our law enforcement community. Hopefully you can see that you and I are Michael Brown. What we let be done to the least of us, we will be letting done to all of us. Wasn’t that the lesson from Nazi Germany ? First they came for the socialists, but I was not socialist. Then they came for the Jews, but I was not Jewish. Then they came for me, and there was no one left to help me…
In the government’s eyes:

For further research about the coming police state, and solutions you can use in your personal life, please consult my book. Awakening: The Rise of Truth Begins

No comments:

Post a Comment

Please be advised that submitted comments will only be published if they are free from obscene profanity, explicit phrases and personal character assassinations containing explicit language. Please feel free to express your opinion, however we do request that all comments are of a courteous nature. No abusive or vulgar comments will be published.