"Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court." --U.S. Constitution
When a group of people gather and forcibly try to prevent a public law from being executed, they are guilty of levying war against the United States. They can be tried under the Constitution. Under Washington law under RCW 9A. 76.020: (1) A person is guilty of obstructing a law enforcement officer if the person willfully hinders, delays, or obstructs any law enforcement officer in the discharge of his or her official powers or duties.
The inhabitants of CHOP/CHAZ clearly obstructed officers who were responding to an emergency. More than one member of this group did so, so it clearly fits under the levying war against the United States. I have also seen numerous pictures from inside CHAZ with "Insurrection" flags. This is not a "peaceful protest" but an attempt to take over the government.
If our own leaders are going to look the other way, and support treason, they, too, should be arrested and tried for it. A peaceful protest (as protected under the Constitution) does not involve physical violence, property destruction, or theft. Every time we see an image from CHOP/CHAZ all we see is property destruction. That is not a peaceful protest that is protected by the Constitution, but a violent one. How long are leaders going to look the other way and allow violent traitors to continue their violence against our country?
Showing posts with label police. Show all posts
Showing posts with label police. Show all posts
Tuesday, June 23, 2020
Sunday, June 7, 2020
Saturday, March 7, 2020
Please Tell Me in What Way Nathaniel Woods is an "Innocent Man?"
Dear Martin Luther King III,
Please tell me in what way Nathaniel Woods is an "innocent man?" Have you even read the transcript of the trial in which Mr. Woods was convicted? Mr. Woods and his buddy, Mr. Spencer, were known drug dealers who dealt drugs. More than two people came forward at Mr. Woods' trial and stated that these two both dealt drugs together each day in a partnership from their house. These people testified that both had made statements that they were tired of the police bugging them. Mr. Woods had a warrant out for his arrest because he had already allegedly harmed another person.
When the police officers went to Mr. Woods' apartment that fateful day, they did not have any weapons drawn. They asked Mr. Woods to come out so they could serve the warrant--which he refused to do. Mr. Woods asked to see the warrant, and even after they showed it and his picture to him, he refused to come out of the house, and ran back into the living room, where Mr. Spencer was waiting with a rifle. At this time the one police officer did pull out a can of mace, but according to witness testimony, this mace was never used. In fact, Mr. Woods kept the police officers attention away from Mr. Spencer by begging the police officer not to spray him and telling him he surrendered.
Please explain in what way a person who deals drugs to others in the neighborhood, and who allegedly hurt others so badly there was a warrant for his arrest, and who instead of surrendering at the door when presented with the warrant ran into the house--into the only room in the house where his co-partner in dealing drugs could easily shoot the police officers trying to arrest him--, and then upon leaving the house stepped out of the way so Mr. Spencer could shoot yet another police officer when Mr. Woods opened the door and saw him standing in the doorway--please explain how this man is "innocent." Keep in mind that under federal law (which Mr. Woods was not tried under since he had been already convicted and sentenced to death under Alabama law), if you are a drug dealer and homicide is committed in the course of your dealing drugs that you can receive the death penalty. The supreme court has upheld this law. Both Mr. Woods and Mr. Spencer had made previous statements multiple times (whether in "jest" or not) that they were tired of the police interfering with their trade and wanted to kill the police to show them they were tired of it. Is not the one way to determine whether a statement is made in jest or not by the actions that follow that statement?
About 70,000 people die each year from overdosing on drugs. Nearly 14,000 people died from cocaine overdoses in 2017 alone. The highest rate of cocaine deaths affected African Americans. Do you really think your father would be proud that you are calling Mr. Woods, who was a noted cocaine dealer prone to violence, including the domestic assault warrant that was being served to him at the time of the officers deaths, "innocent?" Multiple people testified to these facts at Mr. Woods' trial--the same trial you claim was "mishandled," if you had taken the time to read it before making a statement about it. You seem to think that just because a known drug dealer is not the trigger man in a homicide he should not be convicted and sentenced to death--but the laws of our land say different. How are you advancing the relationship between people of different skin tones and cultural backgrounds when you stand behind a drug dealer who instead of going with the cops when served a warrant ran into his home to a room where his co-drug dealing buddy had a gun aimed on them?
Please tell me in what way Nathaniel Woods is an "innocent man?" Have you even read the transcript of the trial in which Mr. Woods was convicted? Mr. Woods and his buddy, Mr. Spencer, were known drug dealers who dealt drugs. More than two people came forward at Mr. Woods' trial and stated that these two both dealt drugs together each day in a partnership from their house. These people testified that both had made statements that they were tired of the police bugging them. Mr. Woods had a warrant out for his arrest because he had already allegedly harmed another person.
When the police officers went to Mr. Woods' apartment that fateful day, they did not have any weapons drawn. They asked Mr. Woods to come out so they could serve the warrant--which he refused to do. Mr. Woods asked to see the warrant, and even after they showed it and his picture to him, he refused to come out of the house, and ran back into the living room, where Mr. Spencer was waiting with a rifle. At this time the one police officer did pull out a can of mace, but according to witness testimony, this mace was never used. In fact, Mr. Woods kept the police officers attention away from Mr. Spencer by begging the police officer not to spray him and telling him he surrendered.
Please explain in what way a person who deals drugs to others in the neighborhood, and who allegedly hurt others so badly there was a warrant for his arrest, and who instead of surrendering at the door when presented with the warrant ran into the house--into the only room in the house where his co-partner in dealing drugs could easily shoot the police officers trying to arrest him--, and then upon leaving the house stepped out of the way so Mr. Spencer could shoot yet another police officer when Mr. Woods opened the door and saw him standing in the doorway--please explain how this man is "innocent." Keep in mind that under federal law (which Mr. Woods was not tried under since he had been already convicted and sentenced to death under Alabama law), if you are a drug dealer and homicide is committed in the course of your dealing drugs that you can receive the death penalty. The supreme court has upheld this law. Both Mr. Woods and Mr. Spencer had made previous statements multiple times (whether in "jest" or not) that they were tired of the police interfering with their trade and wanted to kill the police to show them they were tired of it. Is not the one way to determine whether a statement is made in jest or not by the actions that follow that statement?
About 70,000 people die each year from overdosing on drugs. Nearly 14,000 people died from cocaine overdoses in 2017 alone. The highest rate of cocaine deaths affected African Americans. Do you really think your father would be proud that you are calling Mr. Woods, who was a noted cocaine dealer prone to violence, including the domestic assault warrant that was being served to him at the time of the officers deaths, "innocent?" Multiple people testified to these facts at Mr. Woods' trial--the same trial you claim was "mishandled," if you had taken the time to read it before making a statement about it. You seem to think that just because a known drug dealer is not the trigger man in a homicide he should not be convicted and sentenced to death--but the laws of our land say different. How are you advancing the relationship between people of different skin tones and cultural backgrounds when you stand behind a drug dealer who instead of going with the cops when served a warrant ran into his home to a room where his co-drug dealing buddy had a gun aimed on them?
Friday, April 10, 2015
Walter Scott Witness Lied to get Police Officer in Trouble
The title of my post says it all. The witness who filmed the scene stated that Scott did not try to get the taser out of Officer Slager's hand (as Slager reported). However, he needed to do a little bit better video editing if he wanted to make this statement. In the beginning of the video (as seen on CNN), you can clearly see that Scott is fighting over the taser.
In fact, you can even see the taser on the ground after the scuffle:
It also seems as if the cop were shot by Scott with the taser based not only on the way Slager is standing but also on what appears to be taser strings coming from Slager's body. Perhaps the real reason he didn't give chase was because all he could do at the moment was weakly grab his gun. We will never know- since the only other witness is a liar.
The guy who took the video (Santana), apparently did not realize that it proves the cop's story (the suspect, Scott, fought over the taser (possibly tasing the cop in the process), causing the cop to drop it, and then continued to flee because he had a warrant out for his arrest). But, in today's media, visible facts are not an issue. They present the story in a way that is sympathetic to mass hysteria. Poor Scott- a man who was driving a car without registration, who has a warrant out for his arrest, who ran from the police officer, who fought over and knocked the taser out of the cops hand and continued to run.
What about poor Slager who lost his job because this "witness" lied? In my opinion, the witness should be tried for slander. Perhaps the real reason Santana fled the scene instead of sharing his evidence is because he wanted to make sure he cropped the beginning enough. The sad thing is that the next time, I am sure the "witness" will do a better job of video editing as America continues this vendetta against its police force. In my opinion, the federal government needs to immediately equip all police officers with body video cameras in order to protect our cops from future cases of slander.
Sunday, December 14, 2014
Cops are not PREJUDICED in America - they treat us all EQUALLY!
I did not want to take down my post on M rated games throughout December because of the high chances that parents may buy these for Christmas presents. However, it is past time someone addressed the fallacy that police in America are prejudice. Please note, I personally don't think there should be any distinction between people with light skin and dark skin - we are all part of the human race. However, since this is about the perceived differences, I choose to use the words "black" and "white." I have personally never seen a black person, a white person, or a <cringing> "colored" person. We are all shades of brown and the sooner we get over pointing out differences in skin tone the better.
The statistic that police kill more black people than white people is (as are most statistics) blatantly LYING. They neglect to tell you that this statistic is VOLUNTARILY reported and mostly reported by large inner city precincts who, in fact, have a larger number of black people than the national average. Consider this, if you went to a town, such as Ferguson, where the proportion of black people to white people is much greater than the national average, then you would expect more black people to be killed in the line of duty than white people - and that would have nothing to do with race. There is an article here, that nicely illustrates my point. This one admits the collected statistics are not representative of the nation, and then goes on to say that is okay and cites statistic after statistic in ways that you cannot compare them to each other and is filled with overly simplified graphics based upon the faulty statistics. For example, "Black officers account for a little more than 10% of all fatal police shootings. Of those they kill... 78 percent were black," is paralleled with "White officers killed 91 percent of the whites... 68% of [blacks]... 46% of all those killed by white officers [were black]." Now, if you will notice, when this article talks about black officers, it says that 78% of the people they kill are black. It then throws in some other statistics before getting to the actual parallel - 46% of the people killed by white police officers are black. Further, it neglects to remind the reader that these statistics come from cities where the proportion of black people in the general population is greater than the proportion of white people. It neglects to give us a nice graphic of how many whites vs. black are on the police force (obviously if you have a situation like Ferguson, you will have more white police officers killing people because there are more white police officers on the force.
Warping statistics and not giving us the whole story causes even more tension. People who are black, in general, say, "See - the police are out to get you." Which leads to more fear and belligerency when black people confront police, which , in turn, leads to more black people getting treated violently. People who are white, in general, say, "The reason more black people are getting shot is because more black people commit crimes." Say what?!?! Yeah - that is a serious problem. Now we have black people afraid of cops and acting like criminals in their attempts to flee persecution and white people thinking black people are criminals.
For the record, I am including a bunch of links showing that police will beat up ANYONE who does not do what they are told:
Sometimes, cops are beaten and hurt themselves. Which is why they are quick to attack:
And for the U.N. to call for an investigation is the pot calling the kettle black - seriously here are some of the police in other countries:
Spain -
U.K.-
France -
With technology what it is, all cops should wear cameras. Citizen photographers cannot (and frequently do not) get the story right from start to finish. Citizen photographers can also edit their films to support their agenda. Remember Rodney King? He charged the police (you can see it while the video is still blurry) and neglected to stay down on the ground. However, all we saw on national news was him getting beaten. We also never heard about all the alcohol and drugs he had in his system at the time (including PCP which makes people violent)or the fact that he was on parole (and breaking it). Since sparking all those riots, he was found dead in his swimming pool from drowning after being high on PCP and while engaged to and living with one of the jurors who ruled in his favor during the civil suit he brought against the police.
On a final note, cops also do very brave and heroic things. I think those should also be recognized. Here are just a few:
Skater cop (can't get this one to embed - sorry)
The statistic that police kill more black people than white people is (as are most statistics) blatantly LYING. They neglect to tell you that this statistic is VOLUNTARILY reported and mostly reported by large inner city precincts who, in fact, have a larger number of black people than the national average. Consider this, if you went to a town, such as Ferguson, where the proportion of black people to white people is much greater than the national average, then you would expect more black people to be killed in the line of duty than white people - and that would have nothing to do with race. There is an article here, that nicely illustrates my point. This one admits the collected statistics are not representative of the nation, and then goes on to say that is okay and cites statistic after statistic in ways that you cannot compare them to each other and is filled with overly simplified graphics based upon the faulty statistics. For example, "Black officers account for a little more than 10% of all fatal police shootings. Of those they kill... 78 percent were black," is paralleled with "White officers killed 91 percent of the whites... 68% of [blacks]... 46% of all those killed by white officers [were black]." Now, if you will notice, when this article talks about black officers, it says that 78% of the people they kill are black. It then throws in some other statistics before getting to the actual parallel - 46% of the people killed by white police officers are black. Further, it neglects to remind the reader that these statistics come from cities where the proportion of black people in the general population is greater than the proportion of white people. It neglects to give us a nice graphic of how many whites vs. black are on the police force (obviously if you have a situation like Ferguson, you will have more white police officers killing people because there are more white police officers on the force.
Warping statistics and not giving us the whole story causes even more tension. People who are black, in general, say, "See - the police are out to get you." Which leads to more fear and belligerency when black people confront police, which , in turn, leads to more black people getting treated violently. People who are white, in general, say, "The reason more black people are getting shot is because more black people commit crimes." Say what?!?! Yeah - that is a serious problem. Now we have black people afraid of cops and acting like criminals in their attempts to flee persecution and white people thinking black people are criminals.
For the record, I am including a bunch of links showing that police will beat up ANYONE who does not do what they are told:
And this one just raises a whole lot of questions about whether a police officer should have the right to ask he not be filmed?
Sometimes, cops are beaten and hurt themselves. Which is why they are quick to attack:
And for the U.N. to call for an investigation is the pot calling the kettle black - seriously here are some of the police in other countries:
Spain -
France -
With technology what it is, all cops should wear cameras. Citizen photographers cannot (and frequently do not) get the story right from start to finish. Citizen photographers can also edit their films to support their agenda. Remember Rodney King? He charged the police (you can see it while the video is still blurry) and neglected to stay down on the ground. However, all we saw on national news was him getting beaten. We also never heard about all the alcohol and drugs he had in his system at the time (including PCP which makes people violent)or the fact that he was on parole (and breaking it). Since sparking all those riots, he was found dead in his swimming pool from drowning after being high on PCP and while engaged to and living with one of the jurors who ruled in his favor during the civil suit he brought against the police.
On a final note, cops also do very brave and heroic things. I think those should also be recognized. Here are just a few:
Skater cop (can't get this one to embed - sorry)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)