"A lot [sic] of these thugs don't realize that a lot [sic] of us officers have spent a lot [sic] of our time downrange stepping in the sandbox and are ready for a righteous fight if they want to bring one," snarled Obie, his spelling reflecting the undemanding intellectual standards of his profession, in a comment posted on a law enforcement-oriented Facebook page. Identical sentiments were expressed by Major Travis Yates of the Tulsa, Oklahoma Police Department, who lectures nation-wide on officer safety issues and editor-in-chief of the publication Law Officer.
"We are at war!" exclaimed Major Yates. "The men and women behind the badge know it. Good leaders know it, and decent communities know it. For the safety of all of our men and women behind the badge, it is time our country knows it." In what some might consider a remarkable specimen of hyperbole, Major Yates compares the emotional impact of recent episodes in which police officers have been murdered to the 9/11 attacks.
"I'll never forget the mood at the squad meeting at 3 pm on September 11, 2001," Yates recalls. " I gathered with about 20 cops in the same room that we had deployed out of for years but this day was different. Our country had been attacked and we were pissed. In fact, several from that day joined the military and others seriously pondered it.""Those thoughts and feelings came back like a vengeance this morning as I heard the news about Baton Rouge," he continues. "Yes, we all saw five officers killed in Dallas last week and multiple shot throughout the week but today's news solidifies what just about no one wants to acknowledge - we are at war."
Nearly a year ago, celebrity Sheriff David Clarke of Wisconsin's Milwaukee County, an FBI-indoctrinated drug warrior who was awarded a Master's Degree in "Security Studies" through the Naval Postgraduate School Center for Homeland Defense and Security in Monterrey, California, issued an undisguised call for action to "eradicate" Black Lives Matter activists and others giving voice to what he calls "anti-cop rhetoric." Such people, he ranted, are "vulgar, vile, [and] vicious ... slime" whom he characterized as "domestic terrorists." He now demands that the public and the political class mobilize for a literal war of extermination - and he insists that citizens must rally to the defense and protection of the police officers whose advertised role is to protect them.
"It's time to come to the aid of our police, our front-line soldiers, by calling this war, and not terrorism," exhorted Clarke in an essay for The Hill. "Avoiding the truth through wordsmithing - the false narrative of the lone-wolf - is contemptible as more innocent officers perish while our politicians hem and haw. We as a people need to declare that we stand with the rule of law, and not with the false tales of the revolutionary Marxist forces, who most recently have rebranded themselves from Occupy Wall Street to Black Lives Matter."
Those who refuse to enlist in that war are "accomplices" in league with "an enemy within our borders [and] without our borders," Clarke insists.
It would be worthwhile to know if Sheriff Clarke would include within that indictment Wichita, Kansas Police Chief Gordon Ramsay, whose department, along with hundreds of local residents, participated in a July 17 First Step Cookout with local Black Lives Matter activists.
"The time's come, we've got to rewrite the playbook on how we're doing business and really change the way we're doing things - but it takes two," commented Police Chief Ramsay. "It takes all parties to come together to make a difference."
Sheriff Clarke and other war-crazed Blue Privilege cultists would most treat Ramsay's comments as evidence of collusion with the "enemy," rather than a gesture of reconciliation by a chief who at some level aspires to be a peace officer devoted to serving the public, rather than the interests of his professional tribe.
Overt calls for civil war by police officials have been coupled with legislative action - at both the state and federal level - to designate police as a "specially protected class" for the purposes of hate crimes prosecution. At the same time, former federal prosecutor Larry Klayman, founder of Judicial Watch, has filed a class action lawsuit against President Obama, activist Al Sharpton, Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan, and the leaders of the Black Lives Matter movement, accusing them of fomenting a race war. In a fashion all but guaranteed to catalyze the racial antagonism he supposedly protests, Klayman purports to speak on behalf of a victim class that includes police officers, "Caucasians," and "Jews."
Klayman's complaint alleges that the public criticism of law enforcement officers by the named respondents constitutes illegal "incitement." He insistently describes - without plausibly documenting - a centrally directed criminal conspiracy led by Obama that threatens white citizens as a class.
"For too long, law enforcement and others, including white and non-white Jews and Christians, have remained silent, scared to speak and act, for fear of being branded racists over the fear of being threatened and harmed by defendants and their accomplices," declares Klayman. "This must stop and justice must be done to preserve the integrity of our great nation and to avoid an all-out race war...."In addition to injunctive relief, Klayman is demanding damages of $2 billion. The instrument has yet to be invented that could measure the infinitesimal chance that Klayman would win that lawsuit, but legal victory isn't the objective. The purpose of that suit is to propagate a unified field theory of counter-insurgency on behalf of "Law and Order Conservatives" who are irrepressibly eager for a nation-wide paroxysm of state-sanctioned violence to cleanse the land of an internal "revolutionary enemy."
Reader Comments
Police, with the little minds they have, think they can bully their way unto respectability. Not likely to work unless the work-able population can be occupied in wealth creation or at least gotten into training programs to be available for work at home or abroad. This will require allocation of big bucks, which are now going into useless wars for Israel, so that China-type high-speed rail can be built throughout North America, water stored and diverted into dry but crop producing areas, housing built which can withstand storm-earthquake conditions. Maybe November election should be advanced so Trump can begin his job-creation, infrastructure refurbishment programs.since Obama has been discombobulated by a Congress preoccupied with Israel's security.
"I'll never forget the mood at the squad meeting at 3 pm on September 11, 2001,"
Most of us, learning more about what probably actually happened, now have a very different
mood concerning 9/11. After at 15 year out, even the thickest heads should be seeing the light...
or are part of the darkness.
Is it not horrific the police officers who are supposed to support the rule of law, have now become vigilantly Cowboys. These police forces, and idiots therein deal only with 0,001 % of the population, but are willing to marginalise 99.009 of the population to prove they're assumptions are valid. They should be removed from any duties as they no long have any grasp of reality.
We are the most law-abiding nation on Earth.
We respect and obey peace officers. Gangster movies are not our style. We follow truth and not disinformation.
Well that explains why we have the highest murder-by-gun rate on the planet.
"Gangster movies are not our style."
Considering that the Gangster move genre originated in the US, and counting the number of blockbuster gangster movies produced and awarded in the US (The Departed, The Usual Suspects, American Gangster, The Godfather I, II, III, etc.) and considering the gangster-like tactics of some of our government agencies--I would say that is exactly "our style."
"We follow truth and not disinformation."
Oh dear--I have lost my will to respond to that today!!! Someone else want to jump in here ; )
The question that nobody is asking - Is this outbreak of violent killings due to another Operation Gladio?
Maybe these enraged men in blue should declare war against Langley, Va.
The US Sup. Ct. has, (as I recall) in at least two cases, ruled that police can discriminate
AGAINST people who are TOO smart. See, e.g., [Link]
'We' obviously are hoping to hire those most likely to say, "Nuremberg? What's that?" How far has the US fallen since when US Sup. Justice Jackson issued those timeless rulings.
R.C.
JUST FIRE THEM.!!!
Time for cool heads. Violence is not the answer!
First of all, I stopped taking this article serious when it started in early with the ad hominem retort; "his spelling reflecting the undemanding intellectual standards of his profession." I don't need that. I'm tired of that same old fallacious strategy. It reminds me of the biased, crap-journalism I get from the Ministry of Truth. In fact this whole SOTT site has begun to feel a little off. Just saying that makes me feel a little stupid now, considering the metaphysical,fringe-spiritualism that has always been spotting this site. I probably should have known better, but there have been some very interesting articles here and I've enjoyed reading more than a few. But this one makes me want to be done with it. It lacks integrity, IMO. It's no better reading than my own silly comments. In fact I've read more intelligent discourse in the the comment sections here...well,maybe not right here, but around here.
Ironic isn't it, the US under the guise of fighting "Freedom and Democracy" against so called communists, fascist, totalitarian and despotic governments around the world. The US people have been blindsided by the propaganda that the US is the only "real democracy" and are now living in that same reality.
When we are able to be in all places at all times, we will know the truth.
If we simply read, and watch videos, we may form erroneous judgements in a wide range of interpretations.
To 'follow' truth, we must first 'know' the truth.
That's why I love the Gnostics so much.
They seemed not to have guessed, or made educated assumptions about things that matter most to them.
Educated guessing and half-baked assumption are all we have until the media is rescued from it's Stockholm Syndrome and opens up to revealing truth on a daily basis.
That may never happen here or anywhere else.
At present, and ever, I must say, in conclusion to my assessments of anything -
How could I KNOW?! "I was not there."
When we are able to be in all places at all times, we will know the truth.
If we simply read, and watch videos, we may form erroneous judgements in a wide range of interpretations.
Y'know that is one of the benefit of social media, there are people that are in places that can document events that happen in real time.
What wrong with reading and watching videos, it gives one a wide perspective to form an opinion. That perspective may be biased, but at leas it gives the user the option of choice, not the parroted narrative of MSM.
That is what totalitarianism is all about, to stop dialogue and dissent
Totalitarianism is a political system where the state recognizes no limits to its authority and strives to regulate every aspect of public and private life wherever feasible.[1] Totalitarian regimes stay in political power through an all-encompassing propaganda campaign, which is disseminated through the state-controlled mass media, a single party that is often marked by political repression, personality cultism, control over the economy, regulation and restriction of speech, mass surveillance, and widespread use of terror. A distinctive feature of totalitarian governments is an "elaborate ideology, a set of ideas that gives meaning and direction to the whole society."[2]
[Link]
You love the Gnostics? Gee! But you never met any Gnostics, and you weren't there, so how could you KNOW that you love the Gnostics so much, eh, bad brains?
Touche', Joan, HFL.
I usually get in trouble when I think aloud.
Nothing wrong with thinking aloud.
There's a lot to be said for giving fulsome attention to the everyday, the immediate, to those closest to you, to your actual environment and to your own directly lived experience, but that ain't all, that's all.
there a "sic" mark after each use of "a lot"? If the writer is implying that it should be "alot" they are completely wrong.