Your tax dollars in action. Protect the people from scary groups that feed anyone who is hungry. Aren’t you glad the police state takes such a proactive role in keeping people from being fed? (E)
Category Archives: Psychological Warfare
The US military as well as other departments within the federal government are developing systems that can do this and more.
They have developed systems that can place thoughts and images in a person’s mind and even speak so the person hears voices inside their head.
These devices were patented in the 70’s and 80’s and are now being deployed against a select few experimentally but will soon be used more extensively. Google ELF (Extremely Low Frequency) weapons for more info.
- Is solitary confinement effective? (voicerussia.com)
- Viewpoints: Indefinite solitary confinement violates human rights (sacbee.com)
- 16 Years in Solitary Confinement Is Like a “Living Tomb” (moorbey.wordpress.com)
- How Minor Infractions Land New York’s Mentally Ill Inmates In Solitary Confinement (thinkprogress.org)
- The Horrible Psychology of Solitary Confinement (southweb.org)
- Torture by Design: Saying No to the Architecture of Solitary Confinement (indybay.org)
- California Hunger Strikers Keep Fighting (dissidentvoice.org)
- Why the US holds so many prisoners in solitary confinement (tv.msnbc.com)
- Huge majority of CA solitary confinement inmates held on flimsy grounds (voicerussia.com)
- What it’s like to spend 8 years in solitary confinement (tv.msnbc.com)
Well…I’m not sure whether this is real or not but it certainly goes along with much that I have observed over the years. If it is real we as people need to reconcile ourselves to the battle for our very souls because these people want to enslave all of us for their vision of a better world. And BTW check out the Georgia Guidestones if you want to know what the plan is that he keeps mentioning in the video. (E)
- Hunger and Thirst Are the Primary WMDs of the Globalists (southweb.org)
- Illuminati Mind-Controlled Super-Soldiers Spill the Beans: Interview with Kerry Cassidy of Project Camelot (2012thebigpicture.wordpress.com)
This is a Reblog from the above blog site. Here is the link to the original article there (E): http://moorbey.wordpress.com/2013/06/03/new-virginia-warden-represses-revolutionaries-fight-smart/
These are the basic examples that were studied in the study group assignment 3 “On Contradiction.” “What is the principal aspect of a contradiction?” How does the interdependence (identity) of these contradictory aspects in prison life and the struggle between these aspects determine things in prison life and push their development forward? This only reveals the true political agenda behind super-maxes as being to repress revolutionary thought, not only in the prisons but even in society at large. The resulting division of staff versus prisoners along racial and cultural lines creates an obvious recipe for conflict and abuse, duplicating the conditions of chattel slavery in pre-civil war Amerikkka where poor whites were armed and empowered to have free reign over unarmed and disenfranchised Black slaves on the plantations.
These control unit prisons were designed to effectively isolate, control, and punish prisoners reacting against abuse. In turn they provoke responses, so prison officials can effectively use these events to demonize us as “violent animals” thus playing up self-fulfilling prophecies and stereotypes to justify the construction of more of these super max prisons. This was the main motivation that brought the Attica rebellion in 1971.
Just two weeks ago a guard was severely stabbed over a confrontation that started over a prisoner who did not have enough time to finish his food tray when the guard took his tray. It’s only a fruitless back and forth cycle played out between poor people who’ve been divided along color and cultural lines. In the past I felt myself and my peers to be powerless, therefore fighting with the pigs and treating them with open contempt was in a sense therapeutic. Even now when I witness abuse by the pigs my inner rage boils over, but I have learned to check myself and stand as a witness to testify against these outrages.
This is not to say that we ought to be pacifists. Even a mouse will fight you when cornered. Individual pigs are of no more value to the system then the cost of training their replacements and they can be replaced from the unemployment lines tomorrow. The system will gladly sacrifice any number of them for the opportunity to throw the book at us and paint us as “animals” and “terrorists.” Simply filing paperwork and relying on the courts is also a dead end. But it is useful to create a paper trail and document patterns of abuse. From my time and experience in these control unit conditions it allows one to see the bigger picture.
The prison system institutionalizes isolation and secrecy. The prison walls are designed not only to keep the prisoners in, but to keep the public out preventing observation or knowledge of what is going on inside. Confronting this crazy system, we need to be the voice of reason that raises consciousness and empowers awareness inside and out. In challenging a system built on cruelty and the exercise of absolute and hidden power against the disempowered there will be attempts to provoke us and bait us to incite reactionary violence from us or against us but we must stick to our strategy and not get pulled into theirs.
Indeed as I write this, the warden of this control unit where I am confined is waging a struggle to use metaphysical tactics to demonize us. But their efforts to distort the external contradictions will only lead to greater exposure of the internal contradiction, the truth, which will build our struggle. We must stop acting foolish like bulls. The bullfighter waves his cape and the bull charges and eventually runs into the bullfighter’s sword. But a smart bull wouldn’t do that. He’d wait for the bullfighter to charge him and face his horns. Over the years I have witnessed too many good comrades and potential ones being wasted. We must organize to win! The end game will never change, we must emancipate ourselves, remove the blinds and foment our minds.
This is ludicrous! These people are crazy. It is time to stand up. I don’t care for Alex Jones‘ style but if the facts are true, and from my research they are, then what he is saying is well worth listening to. At the very least for the information. (E)
- DOJ Targeted Fox Reporter for Espionage (dprogram.net)
- ‘First they came for Fox News…’ (theblaze.com)
- Glenn Greenwald: Obama DOJ Formally Accuses Journalist in Leak Case of Committing Crimes (dailypaul.com)
Link opens entire PDF of FM 33-39.40 Read for yourself what is planned for you as referenced in the previous video. Watch the video below it to navigate to important pages. (E)
USArmy-InternmentResettlement PDF file
- Why Does US Govt Need 30,000 Guillotines and over 600 Million rounds of hollow point bullets? (dprogram.net)
- Keith Ellison (H-Hamas) argues counter-terrorism surveillance of Muslims like WWII interment for the Japanese (iranaware.com)
- Hell No! We Won’t Go!! ( to FEMA Camp) Campaign (amresolution.com)
- FEMA is getting BUSY! (thebubbaeffect.wordpress.com)
- Rachel Maddow: Obama Justifies FEMA CAMP Imprisonment of American Citizens! (twighlightslastgleaming.wordpress.com)
- How to avoid getting trapped in FEMA camps (noholdinback.wordpress.com)
- 5 things I’ve noticed about… FEMA camps (illuminutti.com)
Dismiss this if you like but it is true nonetheless and the solution offered is the best I have seen so far even though I expect it will not be acted on in time (E)
- Lindsey Williams ~ America is next after Cyprus (financearmageddon.blogspot.com)
I trust people will take to heart what Thomas Knapp is implying here! (E)
building public awareness of left-wing market anarchism
While watching coverage of the Boston Marathon bombing and its aftermath, I couldn’t help but notice multiple uses and variations of the word “lockdown” (e.g. “Boston is locked down”). Nor could I help thinking that I’ve been hearing that word used more and more frequently over the last few years, and finding its connotations are troubling.
Internet etymological sources inform me that the word “lockdown” emerged in the 1940s to describe mechanical processes such as shutting down machines in an ultra-safe manner for maintenance (by the time I worked in factories, the term was “lockout,”). Its most well-known usage, however, dates from the early 1970s. Until the last decade or so it was nearly unique to “correctional institutions.”
A prison lockdown occurs in the context of a riot or other exceptional disciplinary situation: All inmates are ordered to their cells (as opposed to the cafeteria, the exercise yard or, in prisons which operate slave labor schemes, their work stations). The facility is temporarily closed to visitors, deliveries, etc. — only “essential personnel” may enter, leave, or move within the grounds.
A useful term to describe a common, or at least standardized, process. But in the early 1990s, the term vaulted over the prison wall and into more general usage. Google’s Ngram service, which traces the frequency of words in books, graphs slow, steady increase in the term’s appearance until 1990, followed by a ”hockey stick”: Between 1990 and 2008, use of the term “lockdown” in English-language books ballooned to ten times that 1990 baseline.
Suddenly lockdowns were no longer just a prison thing. They became a school thing, and then an area, neighborhood, city thing.
As of Tuesday morning, April 16, 2013, Google News reported more than 50,000 uses of the word “lockdown” in the news media in the previous 30 days.
“Salem [Massachusetts] schools hold lockdown drills.” “[Dallas, Texas] elementary to dismiss at normal time after lock down” (for nearly five hours because of a single shooting nearby, but not on campus). “Fallston [Maryland] High, Middle schools briefly placed on lockdown” (because a “suspicious person” was reported nearby). Lockdowns at hospitals. Lockdowns at military bases. Neighborhoods locked down for politicians’ social calls and cities locked down for politicians’ funerals.
Ironic? Portentous? Certainly not mere coincidence. The term is becoming so common because it works. It’s descriptive. Not just of the process, but of the societies in which the process is applied.
America in particular and western societies in general have, over the same decades producing that increased usage, degenerated into open air prisons. The inmates — us — although under nearly ubiquitous surveillance, are mostly left free to wander around (not all of them; last time I checked, one of every 32 Americans was “in the correctional system” — imprisoned or on parole, probation or house arrest), as long as we can produce paperwork on demand and “explain ourselves” to the guards if interrogated. And, of course, until the guards pick one of fifty bazillion reasons to “lock down” the block we happen to be on.
That’s not freedom. It’s highly conditional sufferance. And until we reject the lockdown life and abolish the states which impose it, things are going to get more and more conditional and less and less tolerable.
Citations to this article:
The city of New York is in the midst of a landmark class-action lawsuit. The suit, Floyd v. the City of New York, alleges that the NYPD has routinely violated the Constitution by stopping and searching black and Latino New Yorkers based on their skin color. Since Michael Bloomberg became mayor of New York City in 2002, stop-and-frisk increased by 600%, from 100,000 New Yorkers targeted to almost 685,000 in 2011. Nearly 90% of those stopped are black or Latino, and police are more likely to use force while stopping New Yorkers of color.
Grassroots community groups and national civil rights organizations have claimed for years that the NYPD’s aggressive tactics have inflicted too high a price on the “high-crime” areas affected. But the trial, expected to run well into May, has already presented some unbelievable revelations of police misconduct and abuse, with high-profile witnesses, including high-ranking NYPD officers, delivering gut-wrenching and shocking testimony. Here are five revelations from the trial.
1. Police are forced by their superiors to make up (illegal) quotas, encouraged to make bogus stops.
NYPD whistleblowers Pedro Serrano and Adhyl Polanco put their careers on the line when they secretly recorded supervisors demanding officers conduct a set amount of stops (five), summonses (20), and arrests (one) per month. Quotas for NYPD activity are illegal under New York labor law, but the city maintains that “performance standards” or “goals” that do not include punishments for officers who fail to meet them are perfectly legal. According to Polanco and Serrano, “performance standard” is just a euphemism for a quota forcing officers to meet numbers. Sometimes this requires them to break the law.
“We were handcuffing kids for no reason,” Polanco testified about the 41st Precinct in the Bronx. He said that supervisors questioning quantity “will never question the quality.” “They just want to make sure we have them. How we got them, they don’t really care about,” said Polanco.
In one of Polanco’s recordings, a supervisor says, “The goal is at least one arrest per month and 20 summons,” and an officer who fails to meet the quota may become a “Pizza Hut delivery man.”
“Things are not going to get any better. It is going to get a lot worse,” the supervisor says about numbers.
Polanco explained that superiors retaliated against officers who failed to meet or complained about quotas.
“They said, if we were willing to keep working with our partners, we better come up with the numbers; that if we want to ask for days off, we better come up with the numbers; that if we wanted overtime, the chiefs control the overtime, and that if we don’t do our numbers, we are not going to get it. We were told that it was non-negotiable, that they are going to force us to do it if we didn’t do it.”
“They can make your life very miserable,” he said.
2. NYPD cop admits to setting quotas.
Deputy Chief Michael Marino testified that when he became Commanding Officer of the 75th Precinct in 2002, he set “performance goals” or “standards” of 10 summonses and one arrest per month. When the judge asked, “So was there a performance goal of 10 summonses and one arrest?” Marino responded, “As per an administrative guide that was present at the time, I set the standards as was mandated to me by the police department, yes.”
Marino testified that upon entering the 75th Precinct, he learned that, “Surprisingly enough, the 400 or so officers assigned to patrol all saw exactly five summonses every month, no more, no less,” adding that “It told me that they had set their own quota.”
Marino testified that he did an analysis of crime conditions in the area and then, “I asked them to increase their summons production from five to 10. I asked them to try to make two good stops a month and to attempt to make one arrest a month.“
Still, he denied ever punishing officers solely for failing to meet his numbers.
3. Spinning evidence.
In 2007, the NYPD’s Office of Management Analysis and Planning (OMAP) commissioned a study by the RAND Corporation to determine whether the department’s stop-and-frisk tactic was driven by racial bias.
Given that close to 90% of police encounters involved non-whites, the report asked, “Do these statistics point to racial bias in police officers’ decisions to stop particular pedestrians? Do they indicate that officers are particularly intrusive when stopping nonwhites?”
In a summary of the report’s findings, RAND found, “small racial differences in these rates” based on which they made “communication, recordkeeping, and training recommendations to the NYPD for improving police-pedestrian interactions.”
That was the final report. But testimony at Thursday’s stop-and-frisk trial suggests that the NYPD pressured the reports’ authors to soften some of their original language. The project’s coordinator, Terry Riley, testified that in their contract the RAND Corporation agreed to take the NYPD’s concerns “into consideration.” The NYPD did indeed voice concerns about early drafts of the report, which plaintiffs say led to several alterations to the final product.
In the first draft, the report’s authors wrote of “disturbing evidence” that there was unequal treatment across race groups. After the NYPD objected to the language, that section was rewritten to say that there was “some evidence” of this. In another version of the report, they originally asked whether every stop that uncovered wrongdoing was worth stopping nine “innocent pedestrians.” The department apparently found the language offensive, and it was changed to “suspects who committed no crime.”
Darius Charney from the Center for Constitutional Rights,an attorney representing the plaintiffs, claims that the evidence they presented of emails complaining about these aspects of the report, and subsequent changes, show that the NYPD “clearly had a hand in spinning the results” even if they didn’t doctor the data.
4. Searching groins and socks…for guns?
Stop-and-frisk is supposed to get guns off the streets. Yet officers allegedly search areas where a gun cannot be reasonably hidden, and these searches are often the most invasive and humiliating.
There have been widespread allegations that NYPD frisks and searches go too far. As I recently reported, people have complained that police search their genital areas and buttocks for drugs, even though police are only allowed to search an area where they have observed a bulge and need to confirm it’s not a weapon.
A plaintiff in the case, 24-year-old Nicholas Peart, testified that, on two separate stops, officers searched him inappropriately. One day police demanded he and some relatives get down on the ground. He broke down when he described what happened next.
“They patted over my basketball shorts and I was touched,” he said, adding that they felt his groin.
In April 2011 Peart was on his way to pick up milk for his siblings. A police officer handcuffed him, removed his shoes and felt his socks, asking “if I had weed on me,” he said.
Queens College sociologist Harry Levine, an expert on stop-and-frisk, has linked the NYPD’s astonishing marijuana arrest rate to its use of stop-and-frisk. The NYPD arrests about 50,000 people annually for marijuana, the vast majority of them black or Latino and in the same neighborhoods where stop-and-frisk is prevalent. It’s telling that in 2012, after controversy surrounding stop-and-frisk heated up, both the policing tactic and marijuana arrests dropped by the same amount — 22% percent.
5) NY Senator: NYPD Commissioner told me stop-and-frisk is a fear tactic.
New York Senator Eric Adams (D-20th District) testified on April 1 that at a July 2010 meeting with Governor Andrew Cuomo about a bill (which he co-sponsored) to ban a database of persons stopped but not charged, he raised his concern about the “disproportionate” number of young black and Latino men stopped by police, prompting the Commissioner to say the tactic is crucial for controversial reasons. “[Commissioner Kelly] stated that he targeted or focused on that group because he wanted to instill fear in them, every time they leave their home, they could be stopped by the police,” Adams testified.
“I told him that I believe it was illegal and that that was not what stop-and-frisk was supposed to be used for,” he testified, adding that Kelly responded by asking, “How else are we going to get rid of guns?”
Adams later told reporters he considered Kelly’s statement evidence that, “It was not the people on the ground,” provoking illegal stops but “a policy being blessed from the top down.”
- Court Hears Tapes Of NYPD Bosses Allegedly Explaining Stop-And-Frisk Quotas (manhattan.ny1.com)