Dark History Bright Future Anthem of Evolution- Table of Contents

 

Dark History, Bright Future-Anthem of Evolution by Thurston K. Atlas

Dark History Bright Future   Anthem of Evolution 

  Introduction to Thurston’s Thoughts

 

A-  The Historical View                                               Part B-  Interpretation                      

A- Theory of Critical Race 20                       B- Distorted History  35                       

A- Absolute Certainty  50                              B- Most CeArtainly Did 62                     

A- To Tell the Truth 71                                  B- Pulling the Curtain 93.                    

A- Overdrawn Account 107                         B- The Big Payback 125                         

A- Twisted Reality 147                                  B- Madness to the Method 168         

A- Happy Emancipation  185                      B- Regifting Freedom Again  197      

A- Disturbing Display 220                          B- Hustling Backwards  237                

A- No N-word Allowed 259                         B- Speak no Evil, Do no Harm 270.   

A- Tactical Protest 293                                  B- Power to the Purpose 312.               

 Don’t Say It if We Don’t Mean It  346

 Hard Hat and a Lunch Pail  434

 Mindlessly Tethered  576

 Conclusion 587

 Appendix  601

 

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0CJ5ZX29F

https://www.whenplaytimeisover.com/

#darkhistory,brightfutureanthemofevolution

#thurstonkatlas

Dark History Bright Future Anthem of Evolution- Introduction

Dark History, Bright Future-Anthem of Evolution by Thurston K. Atlas

Dark History Bright Future  Anthem of Evolution

Introduction 

Every so often, there is a seismic shift in circumstances brought about by a demand for change. Those who benefit most from change position themselves to capitalize upon that change. They then endeavor to maintain their advantage to sustain their benefit. But, the same is even more true for those adhering to the existing circumstances anticipating changes unfavorable to their concerns. It is the short-sighted cycle of selfish accumulation and consolidation without considering long-term implications or progress.

In an ironic twist, this hedonistic short-sightedness, selfish exploitation, and immediate gratification usually initiate the resulting demand for change. Figuratively milking the cow dry. The cycle feeds upon itself, continuing to circulate cleverly disguised with different variances of the same dynamic and sequence of results benefiting the usual suspects. Therefore, we must change the operational dynamics to alter the cycle and change the outcome.

The current process is constructed whereby there is no scenario where we, as Black people, collectively win. The odds are partly because our effort to shape the dynamic lacks definition and unity while facing staunch opposition. Speaking to power is vastly different from having authority. Speaking to power is more or less a formal complaint, while authority only exists to the extent it is recognized or exercised.

The objective is well defined in these terms on what shapes the narrative or dynamic. It is having power and speaking with authority. We need our power recognized to configure methods asserting authority to regulate our desired outcome. Primarily, the plight of our race is what is understood must not only be spoken but, to a more significant degree, demonstrated. The demonstration is not in organized protest or rioting but psychology and sociology. Let us systematically break down our constraints with brutal honesty, good, bad, or indifferent.

We must navigate a progressive path to acknowledge our power despite the history of slavery and any arising inferiority insinuations. The historical narrative has predominately focused on the dredges of slavery while ignoring or embezzling Black people’s achievements and contributions before, during, and after slavery. That narrative propagates inferiority to fill the void created by deception furthering the ignorance of white superiority and their insistence on Black subservience.

We should take an analytical approach to detect, identify, isolate, infiltrate, and dismantle our challenges regarding racism. So before any other considerations, it must first be determined what is the objective. Next, what are the strengths and vulnerabilities of the challenge? Then, how can the challenge be divided and overcome? Followed by what portion of the challenge must be prioritized and focused upon for maximum or strategic neutralization? Then finally, what will be installed in its place, and how will it be implemented to further achieve our objective?

The process will then come full circle, returning to the initial intent and evaluating it from its beginning to the acquisition of our objective. The subsequent actions are the steps needed to create any power-wielding authority or influence quantified by practical results. So, the starting point is to build power they cannot ignore. The goal in building it is a strong horizontal foundation. That is the strategic phase, but there is also the practical logistics of having the unity, personnel, and preparedness to accomplish the task.

Any movement starts in silence and thought, building a presence where the efforts cannot be snuffed out in its development or execution. Consequently, preparation creates resistance to collapse,  countering an anticipated condition or a predictable response based on contingency and method of implementation. A lesser power can withstand a more significant power when properly positioned to diminish the options and possibilities of opposition. Any concepts deployed must be applied using psychology and translated into sociological, political, and economic strategies.

Amazon Excerpts

https://www.whenplaytimeisover.com/

#darkhistory,brightfutureanthemofevolution

#thurstonkatlas

Dark History Bright Future Anthem of Evolution- Book Description

Dark History Bright Future  Anthem of Evolution

Book Description 

Thurston presents a candid examination of the sociology of racism, modern social systems, primitive rituals, and religious manipulations cloaked in conformities of ignorance. This is a casual forensic inquiry of history, methodologies, ideologies, and consequences of racism, religion, and economics to formulate narratives leading to our modern challenges of divisiveness and conflict. The sanctity of ignorance must be individually and intellectually dissected for suggestive solutions and future perspectives to identify historical traps of distraction, dehumanization, and deceit.

The book’s goal is to stir discovery, self-evaluation, discussion, and the rejection of counter-productive ideologies, behaviors, and conformities designed for subjugation. Among the evaluations are suggestions for solutions understanding the context of time, genetic migration, economic motives, political influence, military conquest, spiritual corruption, and psychological captivity.

 Not surprisingly, these transcend race to maintain exploitation through servitude as essential to a ruling class heavily reliant upon etymological illiteracy. This anthem of evolution is a call to shed the mental shackles of forbidden curiosities and rational impossibilities. Dare to explore your beliefs as the iceberg of deception melts under factual scrutiny. This must have book is an expansive journey into the tip of this deception and ignorance binding us. Free your mind, un-shield your eyes, and hear clearly this resounding message.

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0CJ5ZX29F

https://www.whenplaytimeisover.com/

#darkhistory,brightfutureanthemofevolution

#thurstonkatlas

Dark History Bright Future Anthem of Evolution- “African American”

Dark History, Bright Future-Anthem of Evolution by Thurston K. Atlas

Dark History Bright Future  Anthem of Evolution

Excerpts regarding the term “African  American” 

Page 176

Otherwise, there is a distinction such as African American or minority, not of lesser numbers, but as disadvantaged. Never just American. The Olympics is the only time we are simply American. No other race or nationality are referenced by a land many of them never visited and ties dating back over four hundred years. They at least have a country instead of just a continent of origin. However, many have populated this country to have the interim title removed from their designation, simply being called Americans.

Undoubtedly, the ability to Americanize one’s image for easier assimilation diverts attention from themselves, especially by ostracizing others, particularly Black people. Those who arrived by immigration now bemoan immigrants while concealing apparent hints of their immigrant origins.  White and light complexion immigrants easily assimilate into the white culture or middle class and are excluded from adverse comparisons and discrimination. Once incorporated, they quickly develop no allowances for a diversity of perspectives or cultures not rejected by their new identity and cultural spectacles.

Their culture is surrendered in exchange for a new identity welcoming them to the Americanized white subgroup. Not having their identity stolen but surrendered, they fail to see the damage and trauma caused by never feeling or escaping the prolonged ostracization our people have faced. Regarding the “African American” plight, they don’t know the half of it. The sting of the whip or the noose around the neck of it. They instead become members of the system by white association. The system and the integration become indistinguishable.

People are molded to be inflexible and dismissive, while systems are designed rigidly but fickle. Taking the country back for conservative values is maintaining the violation of church and state for religious values to mandate legislative foundations supplementing sociological biases. These customary biases and identities are preferred as normal behavior well entrenched, while any deviation is abnormal or fearfully anticipated. The imbalance that produces their comfort disregards the aggrieved party’s demand for consideration, essentially minimizing and dismissing claims with indignant outrage.

The way it has been is prone to narcissistic impositions by rejecting the evolution of intolerance and discontent to instead embracing inclusion. The majority inclination has shifted from the majority ideology of controlling minority populations. Yet, the now racist minority ideology resists the changing times seeking to rule the majority. The ignorance of the past attempts to paralyze the present and remains opposed and fearful of future possibilities and expectations. Redefining the constructs of society, self-identity, and equality is deemed a threat.

Marginalized society is no longer happy with whatever scraps procured, instead wanting whatever possibilities and considerations advantaged white’s receives. Wanting equilibrium of opportunity and social treatment impartially available and applied. The contempt and discontent are prevalent and pervasive on many levels regarding a biased irrelevant and suppressive application or standard.

However, a stark difference exists, whether it is gender inequality, pay inequality, religious discrimination, educational gaps, healthcare deficiencies, lifestyle orientation, and many others, not just racial profiling and social injustices. Moreover, many deep traumas have been directed towards all subgroups not representative of the dominant controlling group despite being members of other dominant subgroups such as educated, male, or the double whammy, Black and female. Every subgroup has a learned behavior with defining expectations and benefits and is subjected to judgment from other subgroups’ prejudices.

However, the problem arises when it minimizes or infringes on another subgroup to be defined by the standards beneficial to the dominant subgroup. Thus preferences are common to all humans or specific taxon, but the exercise of dominance and privilege where none exist based upon a manipulated interpretation or advantage violates humanity. Continued practice of this violation is not a deterrent for change, it invites it by unfairness. On the contrary, it dictates perseverance because to concede is to assure the imbalance of identity, perspective, and privilege continues.

Page 389

I have a theory, maybe a wacky theory but follow me. Suppose we travel back far enough to the origin of life in Africa. Wouldn’t that make everyone walking the earth African and all Americans African American? Suppose all bi-racial people claim their presumably socially dominant racial identity instead of the lowest relegation of their racial identity. Wouldn’t that make them white if they so choose?

Sort of the reverse one-drop rule where one drop of white blood would make you white or whatever race contributed to your identity. If Canaan was made Black by Noah to curse his father, Ham, then can’t all Blacks claim to be White being descendants of the pure seed of Ham directly from Noah or Canaan when he was white? What about as a descendant of Adam? Genealogy allows for claims of many variations of race or identity.

Furthermore, if people can choose to be non-binary, a singular person can identify as plural, and anyone can be white then why can’t Blacks claim to be any race, even white or no race, as a matter of self-identity, even for government purposes? Why not if it is based on self-identification or ancient history? So what is African American? Is it a color, a lineage, or a classification that secretly segregates us as a distinction other than American?

Look at any government form; under white, it does not have any distinction outside the collective family of white, none indicating origins or lineage. Maybe, everyone’s identity should be an x on forms to eliminate race as a consideration. Makes me wonder if race or gender is even needed since it is questionable what benefits the distinction brings. Arguably, it is more used for discrimination. This could indicate that some re-evaluating needs to occur when these terms have or should have no bearing on determinations or qualifications. But let’s go to the deep waters.

Case in point, to some the greatest President of all times, 45, who claims the confederate heritage and an all-American persona grandfather and grandmother was born in Kallstadt. But he claims white, not German or European. It goes unquestioned and is acceptable because, quietly, most designations of white fall in the immigrant category of impersonating a legacy of American heritage.

My grandmothers and grandfathers were born in Mississippi and Georgia, but I need to claim African American. Their parents and grandparents were born in America. It is a sly segregationist distinction where Black and brown people are further diluted as people of color. These distinctions are misleading, ambiguous, or flat-out lies. We are relegated to a continent or hemisphere, while other races belong to a country, province, city, or culture.

Whites can be of any nationality to claim white. All dark complexion people are not directly from Africa, although all humanity is from Africa, so how far back are we going? If that make all Americans African American by ancestry, whereas a naturalized African would be what? African Americans too, regardless of color. If born in Africa and naturalized in America, that seems to make you African American more than Black. But what that would make you is knowing your natural heritage, which we cannot claim. Still, their struggle is not removed from ours, our reference point is simply different.

Therefore African American signifies unknown origins and lost heritage. How many claim America as their homeland and heritage to take back America? But their roots don’t go back as far as ours in America? They will claim the country but not the atrocities. That would make America ours before it was theirs by way of their immigrant legacy. We have been the N-word, coons, coloreds, negroes, blacks, people of color, and African Americans in the ever-shifting saga of our assigned identity. I claim Black with pride just as others claim their distinction, even confederate, but they refuse to claim squatter.

Black is a legacy American whose ancestors were subjected to slavery, reminding me of my obligation to not defile their sacrifices and tribulations. The analogy is often inconsistent when attempting to retrofit an identity or association. By that metric, is there such thing as Confederate American or Immigrant American according to their heritage and ancestry? Most whites are of immigrant origins compared to descendants of slaves, but they also arrived on a boat, most after us. African American is furthering an insidious distinction that undermines the concept of equality. Minority applies to everyone from Black people to gender, disability, religion, and soon-to-be white in approximately thirty years.

Race is a delusion of numbers and classifications by disproportionate criteria. The technical distinctions defy logic while casually applied. By designation, the census and office of OMB consider African Americans to be anyone whose ancestors’ origins are traced back to the lower regions of Africa, below the northern portion or sub-Saharan. I would imagine even indirectly from another land. So realistically, African American is a polite way to say slave descendant. Everyone else on the globe can be considered white, even if from Africa.

By definition, it is firmly consistent a dark complexion person or so-called Black from the northern part of Africa is white by geography. So with the geographical origins set by that criteria, how does anyone else become classified as African American if not by color? The spectrum of color variations in all lands further extracts light complexion appeal as the overwhelming and overriding criteria simulating whiteness but not by geography. So by geographical designation as evidence, it reveals in general not where they hijacked us from but a dark skin aversion.

By the same curiosity, what slave trade or immigration globally have others undergone in four hundred and fifty years? Does it reflect their geographical origins for direct comparison to ours during the same period? That changes many things in the world, but many it doesn’t change. Globally connect the systems, ideological cultivations, and echoing beliefs throughout that time for an accurate portrait of comparison. From origin to evolution, follow the continuity of repetition over time. The repetition of time cast its shadow as truth without breath possessing only time with more assumed than spoken.

Page 399

This brings it back full circle to the descendant from slavery labeling disguised as African American. Maybe they need to know to exclude us rather than ensure we are included. White includes every light complexion nationality without further distinction whereby they are incorporated by deceptive but established means regardless of time or history in America. Skin tone grants automatic membership and privileges from day one. This is also true for other darker complexion nationalities so long as they are not Black.

Page 401

It would then seem culture not colorism is at play. It also confirms white is more of a social status of inclusion not a race. With African American meaning the descendant of slaves and white meaning everyone else, including descendants of slave owners, it also denotes us not being accepted as belonging on or from this land. White exclaim they need to take their country back, but it was inhabited when they arrived, but no mention of returning it and definitely not vacating it. But, we are welcome to return by boat to Africa when we have been here before almost everyone saying we don’t belong.

Relocated by slavery, our designation is the closest estimation of commonality, Africa, even if over four hundred years ago or more. But, African American also denotes being of unknown origins or lineage from a miscellaneous bin of humanity. It gets confusing because white is miscellaneously composed and defined only by what has not been included, Black people, ignoring genealogy. African American is an oxymoron. Africans suggest we don’t belong here, and American likewise suggest we don’t belong there. Yet, we are tolerated in America as orphans with no specific nationality or ancestral identity.

Africa’s Incarcerated Liberation

Sub Heading 4

Generate custom solutions with the possibility to create synergy. Amplify outside the box thinking yet be on brand.

Link 4

Sub Heading 5

Demonstrating sprints in order to innovate. Build innovation to innovate. Drive outside the box thinking and try to think outside the box.

Link 5

Sub Heading 6

Leverage cloud computing but funnel users. Repurposing stakeholder management yet think outside the box. Grow core competencies with a goal to re-target key demographics.

Link 6

Sub Heading 7

Generate custom solutions with the possibility to create synergy. Amplify outside the box thinking yet be on brand.

Link 7

Sub Heading 8

Demonstrating sprints in order to innovate. Build innovation to innovate. Drive outside the box thinking and try to think outside the box.

Link 8

Sub Heading 9

Leverage cloud computing but funnel users. Repurposing stakeholder management yet think outside the box. Grow core competencies with a goal to re-target key demographics.

Link 9

Africa’s Incarcerated Liberation is provisional freedom under imposed conditions of autocratic approval. The context of current African events, post-transatlantic slave history, and historical geopolitical atrocities of ideologies long ago presumed abolished still flourishes. Attempts to hide its presence and purpose only expose the ideology’s modus operandi aligned with its prime objective.

So, any glare of scrutiny reveals the deformity of imposed arrangements that accomplish the same result but by far more insidiously disguised methods. The circumference of a circle is the radius of all it encompasses. An ideology’s radius is not full circle because, as various methods may have run their course, the philosophy rotates around its axis tethered to its origin.

Therefore, the ideology has only completed a cycle along its radius. The contemporary cosmetic makeover of exploitation and oppression are inheritances of racism. The liberation from imperialism, colonialism, and captivity is once again substituted with delusions of inclusion, blatant exploitation, and indiscriminate subjugation.

The names and locations remain the same while the method and degree of severity are metered to the level of tolerance, vulnerability, or coercively incentivized leverage. The political and economic arm-twisting extortion is an autonomy and resource shakedown of rippling proportions and stagnation.

Many may suspect this is a reference to their location and circumstances. However true that may be, this is a reference to where, for many of us, the larceny all began in Sub-Saharan Africa. Yet, there is no need to regurgitate centuries of slavery’s atrocities. History is often viewed as the past and negligently absent of the radius of current events.

So, let’s focus on global diplomacy, specifically between 1884 and 1960, dictating the current events. This modern enslavement ideology incognito manifesto is either captivity by economic dependency or suffocation by debilitating sanctions. It is not a ghost or a vile resurrection but, despite denials, a sinister sequel for all to see.

The historical colonialist ideology and ominous expression are evident in the many intrusions currently occurring in Africa. These violations are globally and intentionally omitted and reduced by political propaganda, instigated instability, and guided distractions.

Still, nonetheless, briefly suspending the subjectivity of our reality to assess recent rumblings in Africa objectively reveals the supremacy ideology’s naked encroachment. It is a political, economic, and sociological macrocosm of the historical microcosmic racist replication in practice.

These are global incursions from decisions made not so long ago significantly contributing to global and regional conflicts and abuses of today. These incursions are not ancient history or geriatric grievances but modern-day dilemmas and devastation vindicated by antiquated reasonings. The despicable resumes, characters, and motivations of these social architects and their intent are generally unquestioned but not always known.

The current supposedly diplomatic process reflects the lack of diplomacy in its original purpose. This diplomacy of extortion and extraction has endured time and alteration. The current arrangement generates and sustains insatiable foreign interest, stifling African countries and the whole continent. Obviously, fairness is not considered good diplomacy.

Africa’s stipend from the benefits and development of their resources and wealth accumulation are geo-politically regulated as a domino effect of chattel slavery in practice and ideology adjusted for modern times. So, moving swiftly through history, the foundational premise for current consideration is the present geopolitical disorder in Africa.

The current cycle of historical revelations in Africa is inherited from atrocities committed primarily in the 1900s and well within the range of two generations. The precursor was established in about 1883, including Otto Von Bismarck of Prussia and Germany, “the butcher of the Congo” King Leopold II of Belgium, and The Berlin Conference.

They are the ignition for both world wars, the formation of NATO and the UN, Apartheid, and the current model of economic mugging of the Sub-Saharan African continent. It is characterized by developmental strangulation, pilfering fiscal policies, and embezzlement of political sovereignty. This mugging causes and regulates the stagnation of African progress, infrastructure, and self-determination.

This imperialist coalition and mentality of racist geopolitical directives are internationally and openly tolerated. So, by the strict definitions and mechanisms of superiority psychosis, crimes against humanity, and economic asphyxiation, we can properly establish the lingering geopolitical impact creating the present economic and sociological conditions in Africa and beyond.

Conditions of instability and intentional manipulation orchestrate the question to fit the answer. Instability is the smokescreen offering few options. But does the instability cause the need, or is it created to justify it? Ask yourself, whose objectives are realized? The imbalance reveals the answer as an exploitive business and social blueprint.

These flagrant violations are blatantly displayed strutting across the global stage. These fundamental global observations of current world events mirror many of history’s rogue ideologies. The principles of liberation are only remotely reflected in contemporary political and fiscal dealings with countries in Africa. Examine the practice and principle for the method and mandate.

A brief overview of the policies causing the destabilization of the Sahel region can only be by predisposed social and fiscal design. The coincidental subsidies siphoned reveal a shameful narrative of malicious oppression and subversion. This sabotage cultivates a fertile cycle of social hardship, resource depletion, and wealth heist.

What is the accumulated wealth depletion? Under the promises and cloak of democracy, international assistance, regional development, and security support, the price is no longer worth it. Often, the ulterior motives of exploitation are concealed by smiling faces, glad hands, and righteous postures. The economic three-card monte game slithers as a vicious predator amidst a vulnerable reliance of little resort.

Subsequently, history repeats itself as expectations have again proven to be a fleeting friend and dependency a fatal flaw. The geopolitical coalitions formulated then are still definitively shaping the global landscape. So, let’s explore recent history and present implications to analyze the objectives, methods, and consequences critically.

The vast and tangled web of this foundational diagram is the Berlin Conference or Congo Conference in 1884. It established territorial boundaries, regulated the orderly post-colonialization of Africa, and expulsion of fiscal and political autonomy. This is, by all accounts, allegedly post-chattel slavery.

Otto Von Bismarck, who was the seminal inspiration for Adolf Hitler, assembled the conference. Hitler aspired to return Germany to the greatness it possessed under Bismarck and in rebuke to the crippling Treaty of Versailles. Bismarck believed in blood and iron diplomacy as coercive persuasion for German unification and expansion by conquest, as later did Hitler.

Hitler’s racist inclinations and hatred were significantly honed by the twisted Aryan sentiments of Sir William Jones, Joseph Arthur de Gobineau, and Johann Gottlieb Fichte under Bismarck’s shadow. A direct ideological lineage can be connected from them to Germany’s role in both world wars. Bismarck’s temperature was conquered by all means, similar to the Doctrine of Discovery and several Papal Bull decrees of the Church.

The following century plus of global racism and predatory arrangements were influenced accordingly, especially in the southern hemisphere. European imperialism and Aryan proclivities and immoralities of global parasitic psychosis were disguised and deployed once again. History obscures the significance of Bismarck’s ravage on Africa by bolstering his value to Germany and Europe fostered by a cooperative effort to divvy up and occupy Africa.

The Berlin Conference (1884-1885) hosted by Bismarck at the request of Portugal was mostly to referee trade routes and territorial rights of European intruders pursuing imperialistic conquest in Africa. Next, enter Leopold II, who was appointed ruler of this region, ushering in a revitalized level of brutality and exploitation, including genocide, mutilation, and abduction to compel slave labor.

Leopold killed over ten million Africans as well as the dismemberment of children. Remember, this is not over four hundred years ago but a little over one hundred years ago in the early 1900’s. Ironically, a change in geopolitical appetite ended Leopold’s reign of terror in Africa.

The next period in Europe witnessed a scavenging instability the conference sought to rectify. During the 1910s, the feeding frenzy of ambition and consolidation led to WWI (1914-1918). The conclusion of WWI resulted in Germany being liable and gutted by penalty and debt.

This debilitating condition created the perfect political storm for the rise of the Third Reich, ultimately leading to WWII (1939-1945) and the 1938 Time Magazine Man of the Year’s campaign of anarchy. Diplomatically, the combustive period of the 1910s to 1960 experienced global unrest and unabated conquest.

The incidents of sanctioned consolidation blossomed with the Treaty of Versailles (1919), the Monroe Doctrine (1923), the United Nations (1945), Apartheid (1948), NATO (1949), and many more alliances to consolidate global dominance and control by asserting their dogmatic ideology. It is regulated by power, greed, and imperialistic arrogance. 

The lingering ideologies span the preceding beliefs and prevailing interpretations, postulations, and fabrications of Jones, de Gobineau, and Fichte’s entitlements of imperialistic excuses and misconceptions. Consequently, a post-WWII reality exposing the freedom and democracy protecting hooligans reveals the continuation of the same ideology supplanted by a revised explanation.

The global application is directed primarily at former colonies of colonialism, territories of conquest, and long-suffering lands of predatory exploitation despite their so-called liberation. Even after independence, the global colonizers continued to maintain authority and undue influence, similar to Jim Crow.

The ideology is the enslaver, while the act is the blunt instrument of submission such as force, debt, under-development, geopolitics, and many others to subvert liberation. Liberation is mainly granted to a degree of fading adherence or Africa’s inability to wiggle out from under manufactured obstructions and challenges. Liberation has proven elusive and transactional, although dated for reference.

Mali (1960 France), Niger (1960 France), South Africa (1994 Nationalist Party, 1961 Britain), Libya (1951 Britain) Chad (1961 France), Burkina Faso (1960 France), Ghana (1957 Britain), Guinea (1958 France, 1973 Portugal), Senegal (1960 France), Nigeria (1960 Britain), Namibia (1990 South African Apartheid), and Botswana (1966 Britain).

Unfortunately, there are many more countries in Africa and globally whose presumed liberation is reasonably recent or ignored. Furthermore, this formula is applied unilaterally against those not protected by the coalition of power and privilege.

The trajectory of favor produces drastically different narratives. Therefore, some countries’ liberation and sovereignty are embraced while others are summarily dismissed according to the whims of power. But often and coincidentally, by a spectrum of melanin and lineage.

Without the blessings of power, liberation is granted but conditionally recognized. Therefore, the spin cycle of covert oppression is overtly perpetuated, and violations are disregarded not according to statute but to status. Still, many of Africa’s “liberations” between the fifties and the nineties reveal many such arbitrary emancipations.

That is only twenty-nine to seventy-two years ago. Although relatively modern, it’s been plenty of time for liberation to take hold. So, a current analysis substantiates that the de facto bondages, abuses, and exploitations are deliberately continued. Many African countries are currently members of ECOWAS under French patronage.

This voluntary arrangement is enforced by multi-national troops and NATO as international police serving as the foreign interest protecting muscle. The crux of the problem betrays a voluntary arrangement because why is military force threatened if a sovereign liberated nation wants to withdraw?

Are disrupting food, restricting airspace, isolating by embargo, and imposing electricity sanctions a diplomatic response? A humanitarian response? A Geneva Convention response? Likewise, where is the international outrage? Why does French interest supersede Niger’s best interest in Niger?

Apparently, the swindling of African resources is far more welcomed in France than the African. Why do America and others unflinchingly support France in this mugging of Africa? But, heaven forbid a foreign government would interfere with American or French sovereignty. 

Yet, by comparison, European countries and others are conversely supported with billions in aid and weapons. Their sovereignty and liberty are almost unilaterally supported. So, the global defenders of justice, democracy, and liberation must deem these African countries’ autonomy or arrangements differently from Europeans.

The aid, unconditional support, enabling of abuses, selective enforcement of rights, and wavering fairness overwhelmingly indicate a distinct pattern. Many African nations’ plights are interchangeable, while France’s pattern and reputation is as a devoted offender by plunder, oppression, and history.

The specifics are unconscionable but obviously not inconceivable. France is grandfathered into power as a courtesy of their history and geopolitical maneuverings more than their current military prowess. They are a permanent member of the UN Security Council for this reason. 

They are core obstructionist to sanctions unfavorable to their aligned axis of abuses. As a result, France enjoys certain immunities as a curtsey to a global political façade strung out dependent on resources extracted from Africa. Africa literally keeps the lights on in France and contributes significantly to France’s wealth and prestige.

Therefore, France’s stature is mostly a bloated facade of nostalgic political romanticism and self-aggrandizing hypocrisy. As a pseudo-former slave trader craving Africa’s resources more than the chattel of old in an evolving world where African natural resources are so vital to many, France is unscrupulous.

So-called diplomacy and manipulated desperation are the briefcases for being triple-crossed into coerced seductions and reluctant solicitations as the preferred negotiating manner. But, the lurking method is brute force if disruption threatens foreign ulterior motives.

In particular, France, as a former colonizer, becomes the ECOWAS country’s current overseer, straw-bossing these African estate’s prosperity. The problem has become the improbable solution, except the improbable solution has always been the problem. The international hooligans and their transgressions must be judged by today’s standards when their incriminations are now being committed.

These are by fact, history, and current occurrences executed under autocratic rules and an exploitive ideology dressed a little better and more refined. A staunch unity of humanity, race, religion, decency, and consciousness must reject these exploitations and abuses conducted in any name, nationalism, anger, religion, or ignorance.

What is done to the least of us in the name of most of us takes no courage, just an advantage of power and a depraved mentality. But, dare we expand ourselves from our peepholes and illuminate the undeniable shackles of oppression still panoramically hobbling Africa and others? It is an insult to everyone’s humanity and integrity except for those whose self-identifying sadistic palette requires atrocities.

In which case, Bon Appetit, because atrocities abound. By our resolute and vehement condemnation, all must denounce any appetite for subjugation under any banner claiming any level of fairness, justice, integrity, or humanity. Should not inhumanity be inhumanity despite who commits it? 

Many African Nation’s recent declarations of sovereignty are, in reality, liberation from an ideology whose captivity, abuses, and destruction has spanned hundreds of years. So, despite mainstream national and international media disinterest in African geopolitics and exploitation, we must summon the courage to look, listen, investigate, and analyze the facts.

We must express outrage and categorically condemn these breaches of fundamental sovereignty and humanity. They are destined to invite more direct and collateral damage than actual benefit if not stopped. Consider it far less courage than the courage needed to struggle for economic survival, defend political sovereignty, or declare humanity under multi-national threat.

By what legitimate means does the divine right of life absent oppression not extend to all? Genocide by sanctions, pseudo-diplomacy, or briefcase is no different than by brutality except the method but not the consequence or culpability.

So, like many others, the African must continue to summon the nobility of spirit and identity, which is the foundation of courage. The courage to not self-sabotage, submit to adversity, or enticing hallucinations of empty promises of progress. To take courage in hand and chest to stand resolute in unity and not to repeat the actions of tribalism and feuding that led to our ancestral division and enslavement.

Africa must protect Africa as primarily a solidarity of common purpose, not a separation by differences. Standing unified with your neighbors, although you may have internal disputes to be settled amongst yourself. Africans must not rise up against Africans, period, especially for France. 

The legendary Nigerian must stand with its legacy of pride intact, remembering that last time, it didn’t stop until it was everyone. ECOWAS is what you do if you choose to, but AFRICAN is WHO you are. Be extremely careful of the tool of enslavement using you against you while the puppet master pulls the strings. European commanders used Africans to commit atrocities against other Africans for the misguided benefit of the conquerors.

History only repeats itself where it was not learned the previous time. Now ECOWAS is poised to sanction and threaten an attack on other Africans for the insult of France? After all, has France not committed an insult against Africa? Whose insult is greater, liberation or exploitation?

America recently has experienced a series of labor disputes and strikes to force negotiations for better labor conditions. Is this not also a labor dispute to demand negotiations according to profit and contributions? Why would war, military force, or starvation be the counteroffer to a legitimate labor concern?

If a laborer cannot withdraw their time, exertions, or resources for inadequate compensation, are they liberated? Undoubtedly, the democratic world can applaud and support such an inalienable right and rebellion against tyranny inspired by America’s revolution from British oppression centuries ago.

Seemingly, the African/French arrangement is past its cycle, and the rubber must finally hit the road. It is time for African liberation to display the essence and substance of principle and prosperity with the same terms, conditions, and respect as everyone else. Our actions must negotiate our appraisal and our compromise, not obstruct our autonomy.

Unity of purpose is awakened in Alkebulan to end it where it began. France and the bandits that incite Africa’s oppression and instability must encounter Africa’s unified self-reliance and resistance. Presented as a boulder to broker the best probabilities by collective bargaining of resources. The usual cycle of redistribution by war disguised as a fathom threat, political necessity, or humanitarian purpose of last resort must be avoided.

War reallocates wealth, wealth encourages deprivation, deprivation breeds poverty, poverty attracts subjugation, and subjugation erects justification, which triggers mutual resentment. This cycle causes a reset to protect fiscal, political, and ideological advantages, leading to conflict and resistance opposing change to maintain control and promote stagnation.

These spin cycles of socio-economic agendas transcend national accountability and bootstrapping it to the top. Their imposition generates pretexts by historical controls of coalitions and manipulations. The problem can’t become the answer, while the answer becomes the question, allowing liability and obligation to switch polarities.

The bait and switch follows a prescribed pattern of deceit. When the hidden sponsor of chaos is the savior from that chaos, it insulates the sponsor to prolong the chaos. The deception is a savior’s hologram easily manipulated.

Notwithstanding the previous “liberations,” the ECOWAS is the Economic Community of West African States with fifteen members. It is an economic trade council fostering self-sufficiency through member cooperation, which some members also threaten war and destruction on other members seeking autonomy from France.

The ECOWAS states official languages are French, English, and Portuguese. It is ironic how language reveals past conquests and lingering influences or, more precisely, ideological exposures. African economic stability and development rest on eliminating these influences fiscally and ideologically. 

The African must collectively regulate legacy resources such as gold as other nations do oil, as a true coalition of interests intertwined for African development and prosperity. Any great reward at a future time requires current sacrifice. However, curving time to future prosperity must be geared towards a future time of anticipation and innovation. 

Uranium, Lithium, Cobalt, and other resources are essential for the projected future. But they are also the currency and social exchange for immediate self-sufficiency and development. Unity aligned with strategic coalitions to accelerate facilitating development can be leveraged simply by AFRICA’S protection of its resources.

That is now what the marauders seek. The key is figuring out how to keep from being slapped down in the reinvestment of African capital concentrated comprehensively to produce the industry and infrastructure by tactical economic and political calculation.

The invigoration of African progress is society motivation, investment stimulation, and prosperity accumulation. The difference is these African contributions cost less sacrifice than the arrangement with France, which benefits very few Africans. Besides, any African reinvestment venture swells the African pot for African harvest.

France’s current portfolio, resume, and policy regarding the ECOWAS nations in the year 2023 demonstrate strains of colonialist treachery. What does France provide for what it receives? The gold, uranium, and other resources alone are not enough. France also requires the use of French currency, the French central bank, a military presence, their language, culture, educational indoctrination, and defacing of self-identity.

To strip people of their identity is to assign one to them. Economically suppressing a people by deprivation, scarcity, or regulation of necessities solidifies the population’s dependency. The nation’s dependency is achieved by debt and underdevelopment concealed as hope. Therefore, the misconception of assistance is the trap of dependency multiplied by fifteen countries and an entire region.

There has been some progress and benefit, but the arrangement now has been rejected. The routine plight of the ECOWAS nations striving to grasp the prize always held just out of reach along with the fruits of their wealth generation is over. Some ECOWAS nations are among the poorest nations in the world. This poverty exists despite the richness of natural resources, which repeatedly and disproportionately do not benefit them.

By the way, the United States has a military base in Niger and an unconditional full diplomatic support for France. With France, the United States, and others present in Niger for years now, why has terrorist not been neutralized? If terrorists are causing the instability, would increasing the stability depend on decreasing the terrorists? So, the continuing instability justifies the foreign presence.

Likewise, by extenuation, are the terrorists serving a purpose? Without them, another reason for occupation must be contrived. Nevertheless, the web still spirals. The cloak of global domination and power has proven to be too irresistible and problematic a garment to shed. So it continues. Consequently, the chaos of conquest continues unabated but not undetectable.

Evidently, other major global players of dysfunctional concealments, such as the IMF, World Bank, United Nations, and NATO, provide cover, proving justice must truly be blind. Accomplices are the World Courts of Human Rights, economic councils, international courts, and many others by selective outrage, hollow authority, or cowardly apathy. 

Apparently, by observation, their mission statements are selectively applied, willfully ignored, or, worst, illicitly complicit. Authority absolved cannot overlook, facilitate, concede, or commit the very violations they were created to adjudicate, oppose, penalize, or eliminate, even if they don’t enforce them.

They are not part of the solution but protectors of the problem, which now includes them. These co-collaborators weld fiscal, governmental, judicial, or humanitarian malfeasance to administer buddy passes, winks, and nods of acquiescence. These co-collaborators ignore violations or facilitate abuses as guardians shielding the violators and their interests.

IMF’s purpose is monetary stabilization of currencies, growth, and prosperity. Still, it fosters debt and allows policies contrary to its purpose. The World Bank fights poverty through development and capital investment but is plagued by favoritism and curious transactions.

The UN has disappointed miserably in its purpose of international peace and security by forsaking human rights and humanitarian compassion while seemingly oblivious to economic, ethnic, and sovereign violations. International law and fairness are decimated by the collusion of powerful security council nations and some others’ partiality preventing unilateral accountability, sanctions, or actions of remedy by a singular vote of obstruction.

Too often, NATO is the antithesis of crisis management by fostering instability, crisis, and exploitation. Their force is the puppet master’s shield and sword protecting fraudulent interests based on illegitimate geopolitical agendas. Many other international organizations are paper tigers with hollow authority or little fortitude, but must their voice or outrage also be hollow?

The answer is apparently very hollow and discretionary, depending on who the offender or victim may be. This moral corruption discredits and sabotages the integrity of the process and intent by selective enforcement and colonial alliances of imperialistic mentalities. France, Britain, and the United States have stirred the pot of oppression for centuries. 

Not to isolate them from other foreign marauders like Portugal, Spain, Germany, and Belgium by misdeeds but only by current power to orchestrate massive instability, predatory obstructions, and authoritarian directives. ECOWAS nations yield fifty percent of their gold to France’s central bank for the privilege of being exploited by the mandatory use of the French Franc.

Now imagine all these international organizations being unaware of France’s bevy of violations. What can be the only logical answer? Even the clear-cut declarations of the Geneva Convention violations are ignored without a whimper of international outrage. I wonder if the loophole is only if war is declared or not.

To further the discrepancy, a different response and reasoning is applied for the same circumstances committed by a different group. For example, Niger’s coup was against its leader. Still, France swole up offended by a liberated country they have no legitimate proxy over. Yet, rebuking France’s colonialist residue is considered an assault on France.

War is inhumane, but exploitation and inhumanity are a declaration of or an invitation to war, which eventually results in conflict and resistance as the only options. However, a staunch back with courage intact can be the only answer if it is the only solution. The imperialistic exploitation of supremacy ideologies of the early twentieth century cycles out as its grip of global ignorance wanes.

So, consider the impact on France’s fiscal stability, the Olympic Games in France in 2024, the denouncing of colonialist proclivities of greed and exploitation, or the default futility of a piranha-like feeding frenzy of aggression defending the indefensible. France must decide since they left Africa no other choice, but now France’s choices are limited to African decisions.

This is an economic and moral dilemma for France and their dependency on exploiting resources and a fifty percent gold tariff on the ECOWAS. It is time to renegotiate the terms, diplomatically, of course. Ultimately, French etiquette must prevail unconditionally, yielding to African political sovereignty, fiscal resuscitation, and wealth retention.

Otherwise, the emerging projection is a global conflict and regional instability to maintain a century-old imperialistic Bismarck ideology of a world structure and perspective that no longer can exist or should exist. The time has certainly come to weigh the consequences. Time is not in a bottle of old but urgently upon us. Now, the answer to this has become the question.

In whose name can France be defended? Not even Bismarck’s name. Please make no mistake about it, Africa’s incarcerated liberation continues the racist colonialist ideology rooted not only in history but right before our eyes. It is crystal clear for those who would only take a glancing look.

 Are these the kind of policies or actions, regardless of the ethnicity of the victim, we can condone to protect the economic exploitation of a sizable portion of a continent and humanity? This geopolitical slavery is not from long ago or unknown, so all that remains is liberation in practice and observance. 

Liberation is not transactional as a reflection of fiscal, political, or cultural surrender but a declaration of humanity. History will bear witness to us as it has stood against those before us. We must recognize the unilateral sovereignty and humanity of others to ensure ours. The passion is in the persuasion and not the perspective.

It undoubtedly should not be punishment for daring to better African nations with African resources. Everyone else not oppressed is allowed, and now so will Africa, not by permission but by declaration. Today, a clash of history, ethnicity, religion, or ideology must not devolve into a default response of destruction or display of power but cooperation and compromise of persuasion.

The world is trembling from the addiction to inhumanity and exploitation that must address the compulsions of ignorant ideologies promoting inhumane directives. Otherwise, resentment, rebuke, and rebellion are inevitable. Any apprentice of power must know, eventually, that the dignity of rebellion swells the courage to rise up, transcending fear and control.

The courage to resist instead of cowering in the safety of servitude and exploitation is intrinsic when pushed to the brink. We should all be afraid of what or who we will become if we are indifferent to the plight of others either by our hand, on our behalf, or in our view. But equally important, who are they made to become by us? Life and dignity of life must be mutually maintained.

The world is quick and definitive to stand with others. Perhaps it is time for the radius of concern to encompass the African. If not, don’t cry about who does or when ties are severed. That cycle is over. A new cycle has begun. Now, who dares stand with Africa and Justice against atrocities of geopolitical extortion? I do, do you?

 

 

 

Resisting Arrest Gone Wrong



Refrain from Assault.

Let me state that this is not to bash the police, and I support Police Officers and their safety when confronting dangerous and violent criminals who endanger lives. However, I will not honor these rogue policemen who act from being afraid or, even worst being callous and reckless with their use of force.

Fresh off of the Chauvin verdict, some would say do not resist arrest, merely comply with lawful or unlawful police commands, do not attempt to flee or escape, or force the police to use force against you to gain control. For them, we need to redefine resisting arrest and noncompliance that necessitate the use of force being used against someone.

There is the legitimate reality where force is needed to effect an arrest or prevent death or serious bodily harm. However, during these times, it must be distinguished whether the arrestee is resistant or combative. The difference between being resistant is not wanting to comply, attempting to get away, and combative is actively attacking the police person to inflict damage. Either way, the level of force must reflect the level of threat posed and the totality of the circumstances, including the crime committed.

For example, let’s examine a real-life situation and determine for yourself from the police person’s perspective the degree of fear for their safety or how the combative noncompliance of the suspect contributed to the use of force against them.

Afterward, you can determine for yourself if the suspect posed a sufficient danger and warranted the use of force against them. Keep in mind that laws and police policy and procedures govern the use of force, and noncompliance alone may not be the only criteria for force. Still, there may be some mitigating circumstances to take into account.

This involves a suspect who the responding policeman believed was fleeing the crime scene after an attempted theft offense and being confronted by the store personnel. When the policeman confronted the thief, he was met with disregard for his command and attempted to escape the scene.

He immediately, for his own safety and the protection of the public, physically engaged the thief with physical force to subdue and prevent their escape. The policeman then believes he was met with a monumental struggle that clearly left him out of breath and presumably exhausted, eventually needing backup to control the suspect.

Thank goodness backup arrived to lend assistance as the suspect appeared to be a handful for both police persons. There would have been a tremendous outcry from the public for another non-compliant criminal if deadly force had been used.

Once even handcuffed on the ground face down, subdued, and reasonably under control from the previous struggle, the thief still was insistent on making it home. Due to the struggle, the suspect did suffer some injuries, but deadly force was avoided displaying the police person’s restraint under challenging circumstances.

The suspect’s history was unknown at the time, and I am still unaware of their criminal history, if any, or their propensity to assault police personnel. We cannot allow that, as the policeman to first encounter the suspect repeatedly advised the suspect that he was having none of it. He further explained to the suspect why force was needed and the folly of not complying with his commands. The suspect still did not seem to grasp the gravity of the situation or comply.

To further clarify the danger the suspect posed, the suspect was a 73-year-old white lady for those who it may make a difference. She is approximately 4′ 10′ tall and eighty pounds suffering from dementia. The Young Turks reported her name to be Karen Garner living in Loveland, Colorado. The video captioned “Cops assault elderly woman with dementia” can be seen on TYT. The incident occurred on June 26, 2020. It has come to light because of a federal lawsuit against the police for excessive force. It was captured on police body cam.

The merchandise attempted to be stolen from Walmart amounted to $13.88, which was recovered by Walmart personnel. When confronted, she produced a card to pay and had the ability and willingness to pay but was refused by store personnel and sent on her way.

The police were still called for this scenario. They caught her down the road, walking where he confronted her, ordering her to stop. She did stop, repeatedly stating that she was going home, and proceeded to do so. Shortly after this point, the policeman physically engaged her wrangling her to the ground in rodeo fashion.

Before we go on to be clear, let’s sum up the crime and the policeman’s recourse or authority to respond in how he did. The store refused payment and let her go. The store retrieved their merchandise which amounted to petty theft. The store, most likely and by all indications, would decline to prosecute for the attempted theft. Folks, this is Walmart we are talking about and an elderly lady with dementia.

Furthermore, these stores might want to reconsider always calling the police on these very petty crimes, which they most likely will not waste their time prosecuting. The claim was she pulled down an associate’s mask. However, all charges were dropped.

Think about if she should have even been arrested or given a citation, not to mention physically manhandled for such a petty crime. She suffered injuries to her shoulder (dislocated), arm (broken), and wrist (sprained), not to mention assorted bruises and cuts with blood drawn as a result of this forceful encounter. What was he arresting her for if Walmart had washed their hands?

More importantly, he never advised her she was under arrest, which he must do, never tried to deescalate or reason with her or impede her path. He just basically attacked her for daring to not heed to his command without regard for any prevailing circumstances except arrogant indignation for what he told her to do. It would appear her greatest crime was not obeying his orders, notwithstanding her diminished mental capacity to understand him or her frail condition both mentally and physically.

The policewoman who responded as backup you would have thought was more compassionate or observant than him, but she assisted him and mimicked his demeanor against the little old lady. Thus, the policewoman essentially was an accomplice in the assault of an elderly lady with a seemingly apparent mental condition.

Imagine the confusion and pain she must have experienced. It should be noted that often individuals with these disorders have a higher threshold for pain and thus do not exhibit pain as you would expect or the ability to communicate it. It is a vast difference between holding her or grabbing and twisting, which can be seen to have occurred indicating intentional infliction of pain.

There were much better options available which no one can deny, and the usual justifications I am sure will be offered and possibly entirely accepted and supported. However, the typical protocol after the tussle, she should have been taken for medical evaluation and treatment after being finally advised that she was under arrest and then taken to jail.

The jail personnel should have refused to accept her if she had any injuries. Instead, it was reported that the police persons stated that she was uninjured and she was booked into jail. She suffered from four to six hours before she was sent for medical evaluation and her injuries treated.

One would wonder if the situation would have been handled better if a supervisor was notified to respond on scene and be aware of the circumstances’ totality. A higher ranking official, a sergeant, did respond and reprimanded a brave civilian for interfering with police business. However, he joked and condoned the treatment of this elderly woman, did not order that she receive medical treatment, or display the judgment one would expect from a supervisor.

Furthermore, separate use of force documentation would have revealed the sergeant’s investigation into the justification for using force. The police department and the city’s dubious claim that they had no knowledge of the incident until the federal lawsuit was filed seems disingenuous.

The footage was police bodycam, and a request had to be made to receive. Thus the delay in filing the lawsuit may be directly attributed to a delay in receiving the incriminating video.

Nevertheless, think of all the resources and personnel; police, medical, booking officers, clerk’s office, prosecutor, and judge. Some other incidental personnel sprinkled in who would have had some dealings with this case. Now we can add federal investigators, attorneys, more judges, and most definitely lump-sum taxpayer’s money again.

From a humanistic standpoint and concern for her health, we can only imagine how she suffered and has been impacted. We can only wonder what fate the two police people and their supervisor have faced or if medals and a parade were for taking down such a danger to society.

All three need to be fired, arrested, and charged with felony offenses. Desk duty and suspensions are not sufficient. Damn the cancel culture nonsense. They do not deserve a second chance to display such horrendous judgment again. The lack of compassion is stunning, and the visual use of force unjustifiable.

This video turned my stomach but is an illustration of what is wrong with policing. She wasn’t black, young, thuggish, armed, a threat on her best day, or any of the other worn-out identifying cliche, which is usually thrown out there for excuses. She is our mother or grandmother. That is who she is!

This is in full display for all to see the arbitrary authoritative gutless resort to excessive force against her. Imagine how anyone else would have fared, deadly force, maybe? This cannot be blamed on training or lack of training directly attributable to the individuals involved detachment from the public they should serve while intoxicated with power and control. In case you were wondering, all parties involved were white.

It is the arrogant authority deranged mentality that absolute control and obedience must be imposed. I hope they have better patience and compassion with their family and loved ones who may not understand or comply with their every word. This is guerrilla and gorilla policing at its worst, which can easily be mistaken for racism if a person of color would have been the victim.

It is not always training, racism, or fear for life and limb that elicit these kinds of responses. Instead, it is a propensity for control and authority with no tolerance for anything other than immediate and total compliance under any circumstances. It is not even terrible judgment but a complete disregard for self-restraint or policy and procedures.

This would appear to be an extreme isolated incident that could not repeat itself. By contrast, another equally fine set of police handled a suspected burglary in Port Allen near Baton Rouge, Louisiana, in exemplary fashion.

They responded to a burglary in progress and caught the suspect red-handed calmly sitting in a chair on the porch when they arrived. The suspect seeming dangerous and highly suspicious, attempted an explanation but to no avail. However, it was no fooling the keen senses of these police persons due to their training and experience.

The one policeman preemptively had his taser trained on the suspect, who was slow to respond while offering a lame excuse. Luckily, force was averted, and he could be handcuffed and placed in the zone car.

No harm, no foul, and all is well. But, unfortunately, the menacing suspect then began to yell for help of all things after stating that he did not need to be roughhoused. The policeman who had convinced the suspect earlier to surrender without incident or he would light him up with the taser then encouraged the suspect not to remain silent.

After the suspect continues to yell for help, the policeman then did what he had advised the suspect he would do when his threats and intimidation had failed. He repeatedly tasered the suspect while the suspect was seated in the zone car and handcuffed.

Further investigation revealed that the suspect lived in the house and had misplaced his key and broke his window to gain entrance into his home as he had advised them while calmly seated on his porch. Once confirmed, it was decided that his crime was disturbing the peace by yelling for help and warranted his arrest after having the hell tasered out of him.

The man is Izell Richardson Jr., a 67-year-old man with a bad back and black for those who it may make a difference. He was cooperative and secured in the zone car when the policeman entered the rear of the zone car to taser him at close range. Charges were trumped up, no pun intended, and he was arrested and taken to jail. An officer at the jail then called for medical attention for him to be taken to the hospital for treatment. He was not charged with any crime.

Port Allen can start ponying up his settlement as well. To be tasered for verbal disobedience not directed at the police or inciteful while secured and handcuffed in the zone car is not criteria for using force to this magnitude. Maybe it would have been better to ignore him or listen to him explain.

Mr. Richardson Jr, who is black, is the victim of the systemic police abuses many complain about, except racism probably was not the case since the brave policeman who assaulted him was black also. Nevertheless, he was also representative of the fear for their lives and the terror some civilians have in police encounters.

Both of these incidents have striking similarities if you examine them closely and the symptoms are the same as the Chauvin case. The symptoms are the visual or noticeable manifestations of the illness, disease, or dysfunction. It is the indication of disease, not the disease. Whether we want to recognize them or not, we have seen the signs, but to continue to ignore the symptoms allows the disease to progress and become terminal.

Claims of support and protection for the police are actually the protection of the system. Improving the system to ensure it is healthy and at optimal operation should be the middle ground consensus for all concerned.

Democrat or Republican, black or white, fund or defund, pro-law enforcement, or otherwise must be able to come to a truce for opposing opinions to agree that some of this nonsense and hypocrisy can be dispensed with as distasteful to all concerned. Strong arm assault will not be tolerated.

Perhaps it is time for the police to protect and support the police by not committing these senseless acts of outrage that cause the collective condemnation of their profession. The above two scenarios clearly demonstrate the abuses and lack of oversight from the overseers to police themselves. So, let’s agree to universally police them on this type of nonsense to make it clear that this shit won’t be tolerated, especially with our seniors.

At least we should agree on that unless we were raised by wolves, hell, even if wolves raised us. These are two separate cases of felonious assault on seniors without sufficient justification or cause. The police persons involve getting due process which they did not allow their senior victims.

We cannot protect every aspect of a broken system unconditionally, supporting blatant criminal assaults especially captured by the very police bodycam itself. But, come on now, what could possibly be the delay in arrest and charges prima facie to the video evidence?

These actions forfeit their right to any consideration, and if it is built into the system, then it is time to change the system that gives allowances for this behavior. It is inconceivable that arrest and charges are not immediately upon discovering felony assault on seniors without any police personnel charges preferred swiftly and harshly. It would be nice to extend this protection to everyone. Still, at least we should agree on how we are not about to let our seniors and children be treated in law enforcement encounters, especially like these two non-threatening situations.

This lady and man had their Constitutional Rights violated in much the same fashion that we have seen many times before. Sadly, until rogue policing is strongly punished and denounced, we will most likely continue to see it over and over again. Meanwhile, there are still those who unconditionally support the police in any misconduct or brutality they are jammed up committing, displaying sympathy and support for the police.

Most police do not support this nonsense. News flash they are not the police when committing crimes and these blatantly unconscionable atrocities. They are criminals with criminal behavior carrying a badge.
If they are here to protect and serve, I would hate to meet those here to harm and violate. It is getting to be hard to tell the saints from the sinners.

This is not to condemn all police or policing, but even among the ranks, you have to admit that this is getting to be ridiculous and very damaging. Maybe someone should let these bad apples know they are wearing body cameras and should conduct themselves as such. The egregious must be expunged from your ranks. It amounts to their individual accountability versus your collective condemnation. Amputate the disease so the police body can survive.

Respect to the women and men who do the job with honor and hopefully the tarnish from those who do not will remain with them as individuals for them to be held to task. The time has come to separate the wheat from the chaff, the good from the rotten. Policing is classified as a profession, and profession indicates professionals and respectability.

The hiring process, authoritarian culture, and tolerance for impropriety must be addressed to prevent further erosion of respect and authority. Zero tolerance, and if not, the noose you tighten will be your own, and as for Port Allen and Loveland, where is the love or discretion for the seniors?

This cannot be tolerated, so I would encourage everyone to see the videos and judge for yourself before it becomes a reality near or dear to you, like your parents or children. On that, we should agree, and we can dispute the rest, just not the seniors. A journey starts with the first step, and incremental concessions are an excellent first step. Arrest and charges against the police are a better first step in cases like the above.

We know the consequences of resisting, but what are the benefits of complying or non-combative behavior? A little finesse, patience, and persuasion could save an enormous amount of settlements. But, unfortunately, police settlements are becoming the most unpleasant way to riches.

If the police refuse to accept better options, they encourage payments, skepticism, condemnation, mistrust, and oversight. Many cities are self-insured, which comes out of the city budget or rainy day general funds, while insurance companies insure others.

When will the risk to insurance companies become so great that they refuse to accept the liability or indemnify themselves against misconduct and these large settlements? When will the public or police tire? At some point, the tarnish will be too much for the good Officers to bear, or at least not a laughing matter of pride.

Let me ask you a question to put this into context. I like to reverse engineer situations as if debating where the opposing viewpoints are assigned and not chosen for argument. Just stack it up, flip it, and smooth it out, so pin this twist of fate.

The white police personnel encounters both scenarios where they either damage the black man breaking bones or taser the black man in the back of the zone car while he is handcuffed. Now flip it where the black police personnel encounter the white lady and do the exact same. This should crystalize for opposing viewpoints the crux of the condemnation.

It sometimes is not racial except by the context of the parties involved and the appearance of racism so close that you cannot tell the difference. It is sometimes a culture and psychology present among police developed out of a fear, separation, superiority, and survival indoctrination exaggerated and rampaging out of control, which compels these actions and condones them. The culture comprising the system can only be affected to the extent of changes in the mindset of personnel.

The system changes the personnel, the personnel changes the system, or one or the other needs to be replaced, if not both. Abolishing the police is ridiculous. Transformation is wise. It is amazing how a bunch of egg heads always knows what is best for everybody except themselves.

Here are suggestions for a three-step tango to target the problems and changes needed. One, give a questionnaire to all police departments and court personnel surveying their raw anonymous opinions of their operations, procedures, applications, and suggestions for improvement.

Two, if the hiring practices cannot more evenly reflect the population served, they should be well-versed in the people they protect and humanize a sensitivity to them. As part of the police academy training, it should be mandatory to visit rec centers, festivals, and various neighborhoods to familiarize themselves with the people and the people to the police.

Three, incentivize correction and not monetize punishment for police profit via court appearances, the city and courts via general fund revenue, and the prisons via slave labor.

Everyone does not need to go to jail, but statutory or discretionary punishment must be identical for everyone. For example, the right to bail is not a right if you cannot afford it, so a tier of offenses that clearly outlines personal recognizance releases from jail and bailable offenses in addition to high or non-bail crimes.

It would relieve over-crowding and the system’s accountability for the room, housing, and health of those in their custody. Consider increase community service for a contribution to society instead of a drain. But, unfortunately, desperate times call for desperate measures or at least a shift in ideology.

Fear of exposure, fear of honesty, and projections of failure for deviation from the old system we already know either don’t work or is inefficient will seek to prevent changes. The money to pay for these and other changes can come from the money saved from settlements and repetitive expenditures for resources to maintain the old antiquated system.

So back to the duality of reality. There can be no resistance where there is no opposition, just as there can be no opposition where there is no resistance. There must be compromise and concessions from all sides and assurances to heed and abide by the fair determination of the criteria set forth. Anyone in violation would clearly be deemed out of pocket and subject to that tier of consequences and conditions without respect to color, wealth, or occupation.

The adherence to a one-dimensional past developed for the singular benefit of becoming less of a majority demographic. Supported by a two-dimensional arrogance to maintain and justify the historical, cultural nepotism of those benefits is withering. Put under the three-dimensional microscope of current demographics now demanding a four-dimensional futuristic solution to propel us forward.

What has been can no longer be, and if the changes needed are not met, then what could be will never be. Yesterday is gone. The world is changing, and the old policies of oppression and authoritative domination of the people or suppression of their expression generate one hundred percent dissent and dissatisfaction whatever your position or opposition.

So we all have to give a lot to get a lot, and that is something we all can no longer resist for things to go right.

Thurston K. Atlas

Creating A Buzz

 

George Floyd Part 3 of 3-Deductive Conclusions and Forfeited Integrity



 Uncompromising Evaluation

An objective examination has to be detached from the desired outcome or emotional inclination and should only examine the facts and actions as they were observed to have occurred. Then compared to any explanations given when evaluated against these observations will yield the most precise determination of guilt or innocence.

Strictly an uncompromising assessment of the deeds alone removed from the person’s identity performing the act will objectively reveal if the deed was justified regardless of who the doer of the deed may have been.

For the exact purposes of guilt or justification of actions, it is practically irrelevant who committed the act but only if they had a legal right to do so in the manner in which they did. It comes down to right or wrong, proper or improper, no matter who did it, friend or foe. Impartiality demands that if that same set of circumstances existed with you, it would be considered fair and just.

This is the ultimate perspective of neutrality of judgment required concerning the application of the law. With this lens of detachment, the incident can begin to be clarified.

The clerk initiated the encounter requesting a police response in c/w Mr. Floyd passing a counterfeit twenty-dollar bill. The police responded to find Mr. Floyd was located in the driver’s seat of his vehicle. He was removed from the vehicle, placed in cuffs, and escorted to the sidewalk, where he was seated.

He was then escorted across the street without incident but resisted being placed in the rear of the squad car. He claimed to be claustrophobic, a recognized mental disorder of anxiety, but no exclusion from being placed in a squad car or arrested.

A brief struggle of control ensued with Mr. Floyd being resistant to being placed in the rear of the squad car but not actively combative or aggressive toward the policemen. His practical intent was not to be placed in the squad car, but it was not to inflict injury upon the policemen.

Being placed on the ground prone is a judgment call and at the policemen’s discretion but would seem to contradict any claims of their concern for his previously displayed distress. Moreover, there was oddly no verbal attempt to deescalate the situation or attempt to calm his anxiety, especially since it was not a violent crime or exigent circumstances.

If possible verbal de-escalation is the first tactic on the force continuum scale and would have seemed preferable considering the investigation into the details of the counterfeit twenty had not begun in earnest. They still had not determined what their course of action would or could be. Enforcement of the law dictates that restraint be used comparatively to the crime committed unless escalating circumstances command a more intensive response. Just as you would not use swat for a jaywalker, the response given must be proportionate to the crime committed and the response received.

That notwithstanding, once prone on the ground, Mr. Floyd’s mental state reflected his physical state, he was submitted. He was within the policemen’s control and physically compliant.

He was also verbally compliant, pleading for his life and stating his physical condition of respiratory distress and that he could not breathe. Mr. Floyd offered no further resistance to being placed in the car because he was prone on the ground and not aggressive, combative, or evasive at all; he was secured.

But was he in custody? Had he been advised that he was under arrest? Chauvin demonstrated his total control of Mr. Floyd by Chauvin’s hands being in his pockets, indicating that whatever resistance that had been present, Mr. Floyd was well under control at that point.

Furthermore, Mr. Floyd provided no resistance from the point of being unconscious or deceased, although Chauvin continued the neck pressure with his hands casually in his pockets. Suspect control or threat of harm was never a concern. Chauvin’s casual placement of his hands in his pocket from the start reveals that any threat had been subdued.

Mr. Floyd was never able to account for the bad money transaction where a fake twenty-dollar bill turned into a homicide. Before dying, Mr. Floyd had to pass out first, meaning he was still alive but unconscious.

Chauvin’s continued pressure, in addition to rendering Mr. Floyd unconscious Chauvin ensured that Mr. Floyd had no chance at survival or revival. No corpus delicti or proof of guilt was ever established since the intent was not established that he knew it was bad money.

It should be noted that if Mr. Floyd had been one hundred percent compliant, the incident would have unfolded differently; however, did his non-compliance rise to the level of force that was used and sustained on him. Of course, cooperation with law enforcement is always preferable, but the force used for non-compliance must be measured to the circumstances.

It should also be noted that so callous was Chauvin’s indifference that even Mr. Floyd’s plea for his deceased mother or his unconscious state elicited no compassion from Chauvin’s demented implementation of the ”law.”

Now let us examine the policemen’s actions individually and collectively to establish any culpability. No culpability means that they had no effect on his death, and it probably would have happened anyway at that exact particular time. They did not send four policemen for a counterfeit-twenty assignment, so who received the call and who was assisting?

Was radio notified that they were assisting, and should they have even been there? If Chauvin was assisting on the run, then he should have remained secondary and let the assigned car handle it to their discretion. Was there a procedural discrepancy with the response to the assignment?

Two policemen arrived, and shortly thereafter, another two policemen arrived. The first two to arrive on the scene engaged Mr. Floyd, and he was placed in cuffs. He was subsequently seated on the sidewalk. Nothing extraneous so far as excessive physical force except perhaps the way he was approached could have been handled better.

Next, Mr. Floyd was escorted across the street towards the store. Before being escorted across the street, at least one officer stated that Mr. Floyd was noticeably distressed. What actions did he take as a result of this observed distress, and when? What were the signs?

If he was, in fact, believed to be in distress, it should have changed from a possible arrest situation into providing medical assistance. The main reason is city liability. If he were having a heart attack and was under arrest, then the city would be liable for his medical care, hospital stay and would have to assign an officer to his room around the clock to guard him. To avoid their liability and the city’s, he should have been passed off to medical personnel. He could have then been made a named suspect for future charges.

Aside from that, it is their legal and sworn obligation to provide assistance and not continue pursuing arrest when medical attention is needed while under their control. The policeman who first noticed the distress had the most responsibility to notify the others of Mr. Floyd’s suspected condition and why he thought so.

Considering his suspected medical distress and only having the ability to arrest with prior authorization from the Secret Service for permission, that should have made them get him medical help and be on their way. Instead, it becomes problematic with the suspected medical complication and lack of jurisdictional authority to arrest.

Once taken to the ground on his stomach alongside the squad car with his hands cuffed behind his back, he posed no threat to the four policemen or no threat to escape. It is nearly impossible to get up quickly or otherwise from that position or launch an assault.

If it was necessary to place him prone on the ground, then there is no policy, procedures, or training that allows for any force which is no longer necessary to bring a person under control. Once unresponsive, he was incapable of any resistance or threat.

Minimal force required to effect an arrest is the standard to justify force, but there is no justification for its use and no allowance for it legally when it is no longer necessary. What is the justification for kneeling on a deceased man’s neck for over two minutes and 46 seconds after his suspected expiration? The application of the knee to the neck area is where the criminality begins, and Chauvin’s mental state of mind begins to be detectable and exposed.

At this point, the complicity of the other policemen’s state of mind can be determined, regardless of whether they had participated or not in the restraint; their intent also became apparent. Thus, two policemen did knowingly, purposefully, willingly, and physically participate to some degree in exerting force and providing assistance to Chauvin to further his criminal excessive use of force with no legal justification.

They essentially participated in the assault of Mr. Floyd since there was no legal justification for force. The third policeman served as a deterrent and threat to discourage anyone who would intervene. With Mr. Floyd fully compromised, there was no need for any continued force or support of it.

Chauvin did knowingly, willfully, purposefully, recklessly, and negligently steadfastly hold his knee to Mr. Floyd’s neck area, resulting in his death even if only a contributory factor. If argued that Chauvin’s intent was not to kill Mr. Floyd but to restrain him, at what point did Mr. Floyd no longer need restraining?

Additionally, Chauvin’s excessive force was knowingly and purposefully applied, resulting in Mr. Floyd’s death rendering the force intentional and his death consequential to that force. Finally, it is expected that an 18-year veteran reasonably would have known the possible consequences, especially when warned and other policemen stated concerns.

What cannot be argued is that Chauvin’s knee was certainly intentionally placed there for nearly a nine-minute duration of time. But, further, he knowingly, willfully, purposefully, recklessly, and negligently without regard for the outcome because he replied to concerns acknowledging his disregard.

Chauvin’s actions revealed a mindset of punishment, not restraint, with his hands in his pocket to disguise the downward force and balancing of his full weight on Mr. Floyd’s neck, fully displaying the ease of his depravity, arrogance, and control.

The force used on Mr. Floyd by any officer once he was on the ground on his stomach handcuffed was a criminal act and felony assault by virtue of the policemen being armed and the assault resulting in Mr. Floyd’s death.

Excited delirium by compression is asphyxiation, defined as suffocation or a smothering effect. Breathing restriction and compression by weight is always the main trigger and can clearly be determined to have played a significant role in Mr. Floyd’s death.

As a policeman, you cannot facilitate a crime, or if you observe a crime, you are sworn to intervene, and it does not specify who is committing the crime. Any unlawful act you are sworn to intervene and prevent. There were multiple failures to intervene or pursue an alternative action that could have saved Mr. Floyd’s life.

Intervention could have occurred at the point when Mr. Floyd was believed to have been in distress before crossing the street, at the moment when he complained of breathing difficulties with Chauvin on his neck, and at the point when he had no pulse when checked.

Furthermore, another crucial time of inaction was when an officer suggested sitting him up to avoid the known concern of death from the explicitly mention excited delirium concerns, which was the eventual outcome. When Mr. Floyd was found unresponsive while the public begged for his life were all points when and where intervention should have occurred legally.

During the assault, Chauvin verbally responded, disregarding all concerns and information he knew or should have known. He was an 18-year veteran on the job, a field training officer, and the senior man on the scene. The senior man is always held to a higher standard, assuming he has the most experience and discernment knowing what to do or, more importantly, what not to do.

Chauvin knowingly continued his felony assault and discouraged other courses of mitigation or intervention. He knowingly and purposefully did hold his knee on Mr. Floyd’s neck and maintained it there, fully aware of the risk and without legal justification. The other policemen’s actions were to do nothing to end this excessive use of force and were actively complicit in holding witnesses at bay using the authority of their uniforms and weapons, arguably as criminal tools.

The issue of crowd control is separate from the excessive use of force on Mr. Floyd. A different response regarding crowd control should have been directed toward the crowd. In no way was he responsible for the crowd reaction when he did not encourage it, but police misconduct incited it.

No obstruction charges or otherwise has been levied against any member of the crowd, just as no additional force on Mr. Floyd should have been used against Mr. Floyd for the crowds’ actions. Their fear from the crowd was due to Chauvin’s use of excessive force, not a menacing crowd threatening violence but a rebuking crowd.

They used their uniforms and intimidation of their authority in the furtherance of Chauvin’s crime. Had it not been armed, uniformed policemen involved, there is a more likely chance a civilian would have intervened, preventing Mr. Floyd’s death. Instead, they provided protection while Chauvin committed his crime displaying their complicity and willful approval of Chauvin’s actions by their inaction or support of his actions.

The two rookie policemen knowingly acted to support Chauvin to further his felony physical assault, thereby consenting to his actions and sharing his Mens rea, intentional infliction of unnecessary force. Their state of mind was to willfully, purposely, recklessly, and negligently with full knowledge against all perceived risk consent to excessive force by at one point physically assisting. Obviously, they did not oppose it or intervene to prevent it but did assist in it.

Citizens and bystanders with no time on the job or academy training knew the risk. Mr. Floyd and the public were trying to tell the policemen repeatedly. All four policemen were fully aware that their actions or inaction posed a significant risk to Mr. Floyd’s life, even insinuating it themselves. The consequences of their actions or inactions were known or should have been known that serious bodily harm or death would be the result.

Due to the 8 minutes and 46-second duration of the homicide beginning when Mr. Floyd was handcuffed on his stomach on the ground, all four policemen displayed knowing, willful, purposeful, reckless, and negligent conduct at various intervals while Mr. Floyd was the victim of excessive force that led to his death.

It is evident that Chauvin’s intent was to disregard the risk of death to Mr. Floyd, continuing even when Mr. Floyd was deceased. Chauvin continued until the EMTs arrived. None of the policemen did anything to stop Chauvin or aid Mr. Floyd. All four policemen displayed each of the required mindsets during the duration of the lengthy deadly incident at various times. This was a homicide committed by a policeman that was aided and abetted by three other policemen.

Citizen video, police bodycam, radio transmissions, and multiple witnesses in broad daylight in full view of the public were not deterrents to their crime but present overwhelming evidence against their actions.

The question of intent or guilt for Mr. Floyd’s death would seem undeniable. Still, due process of law and possible plea bargain or sentencing arrangements could be the only reason to claim innocence, certainly not the legal justification of their actions. So how can anyone defend their actions?

Mr. Floyd was a human being treated inhumanely, well below any standard that should be acceptable from law enforcement. Accordingly, the law has no accommodation for such actions. Mr. Floyd’s Constitutional and Civil Rights were trampled and suffocated from his body without compassion by policemen who now hide behind their rights seeking compassion for themselves.

Their Constitutional Rights will be upheld, and due process assured them where defense attorneys would attempt to blame Mr. Floyd for his own death while being handcuffed on the ground. Despite the force continuum, display of excessive force on a deceased man, discrepancies in observable actions, and their implausible explanations, they will try to justify the reprehensible by claiming no laws were broken by them. Perhaps along with some form of qualified immunity will be claimed.

Aside from the verdict still to be rendered from the courtroom, the City of Minneapolis has rendered its verdict. A historic settlement of 27 million dollars to settle the wrongful death lawsuit regarding this incident. The size of the settlement reflects the horrific depravity beyond reason, vindication, protection of the law, or moral standards. It was an honorable action by the City not to justify or minimize the colossal injustice that caused Mr. Floyd’s death. Instead, it is an exemplary example of admission of blatant guilt to preserve government and law enforcement integrity.

Defending obviously egregious acts effectively diminishes public respect for and compliance with law enforcement and encourages resistance to unfairness. The public trust, which took many good deeds and years to establish, can be nationally destroyed instantly by one act such as Chauvin’s. It is only regained when the law is enforced equally, including against law enforcement personnel that violate their sworn duty.

Obvious and blatant violations of the law, duty, and public trust cannot be condoned and tolerated, especially when it is this egregious and erodes the public trust. Such egregious acts make it hard for good Officers to maintain public trust when this kind of policing creates problems for them and erodes their protections.

The negative consequences are suffered by the law enforcement community, even more so than the public. Although everyone in the public does not interact with law enforcement, all law enforcement are public servants and must adhere to a code of conduct imposed on them due to the repercussions of Chauvin-like behavior.

The implementation of body cameras, loss of credibility, attrition of public perception, the increased propensity for resistance and aggression against personnel, defunding issues, decreased union and bargaining power, and the restrictions on equipment fearing abuses against the public are responses to law enforcement injustices.

Other ramifications are more hazardous working conditions, decrease public cooperation, GPS on vehicles, restricting search warrant criteria, use of force and contact documentation, morale decline, and dissension among the ranks.

Hiring and staffing difficulties, federal oversite, qualified immunity protections removed for honest mistakes, and many more are directly related to law enforcement not being willing to police themselves. When law enforcement cannot self-regulate themselves, then more restrictive levels of accountability are placed upon them.

Law enforcement must evolve beyond the pathology and culture it traditionally has operated under to change its method of operation, progressing beyond the rugged, physically tough beat cop authoritatively demanding unconditional, absolute submission to their authority.

No longer exempt from judgment, being protected by their arrogant elite status as the law or by the repressive intimidation of dreadful consequences separated from the people they should serve. Coercion by a quasi-military occupying force which civilians must categorically comply with or force will be justified, is no longer tolerated.

Being law-abiding should not require a humbling and submission to authority even when unlawful acts reminiscent of vigilantism are imposed by law enforcement. Instead, you must simply enforce the law, not become the law.

Unfortunately, police have historically been the enforcement arm of racism, immigration, minority control, and labor and union disputes at the direction of those with undue influence over policy or preference. As a result, they have enjoyed a royal centurion discretion accountable only to their superiors to whom they answer, relegating the commoners beneath the power invested in them, creating fearful respect.

The regulation of authority, punishment, and freedom instill a reflexive apprehension when dealing with law enforcement. We all know the feeling when a police car activates its lights behind us. The perception and projected expectation of behavior during these encounters are generally uneasiness until relieved by their demeanor or the reason for the encounter.

It is usually magnified to a conditioned anxiety if you are a member of a demographic where abuses have been normalized or expected. Racism has always been entrenched in law enforcement and the military with a culture of tolerance and a lack of condemnation, implying a tacit if not often explicit approval endorsing that authoritative abusive mentality when no action is taken, or it is condoned.

This tendency towards an adversarial mentality must be modified and admonished when inappropriate. A police versus the public mentality reinforces a war-like occupying force perspective where the opposition is dehumanized to justify abuses and violations of their dignity and humanity.

Insisting their rights and treatment is an inconsequential consideration and rationalization for lack of accountability regarding your treatment of them. War or law enforcement displayed at its worst should have regulations regarding the rules of engagement, treatment, and capture that it must follow. Law enforcement must follow the guidelines established and, when blatantly in violation, should concede error instead of the righteous indignation of defiance to being judged.

If you will not listen or display reason, you essentially provide no other option except not to be reasoned with, thereby encouraging non-compliance. Thus, you are further justifying a forceful response in a self-fulfilling hazard of your creation.

Evolution is preferable to revolution when reflecting or pursuing social changes, and cooperation by persuasion to convince rather than rugged physicality or force seems a better alternative. To accept surrender is preferred to forceable submission, and if fair surrender will not be accepted, then resistance is encouraged. The goal is not a calibration of machismo but the easiest obtainment of an objective.

Let force be the response to conflict and not the cause of it. Influences of the history of policing by implication, ideology, and methodology must reflect the future of societal tolerances to preserve the most respect and support for law enforcement. The job is not for everyone, maybe not the faint of heart or brutally inclined with limited people skills. For the maximum support for law enforcement to be maintained, there have to be admissions of obvious wrongdoing and misconduct.

It is counterproductive for law enforcement to support violations of wrongdoing; it exposes that the system is broken, and they will not fix it without further restriction of their authority. Law enforcement must be subjected to the same laws they are sworn to enforce, not above them.

It is sometimes necessary and always better to relinquish the part for the good of the whole. But, nevertheless, good decent Officers must not be cast under a cloak of scorn with elevated hazards under hostile working conditions to defend the indefensible.

The police union dues, morale, and resources should not be spent despite members’ dissent for actions they disagree with and know to be wrong. The first rule of policing is to go home every night from the job, the will to overcome and to survive encounters.

The second is not to let someone send you to the penitentiary and jackpot you by their actions. I am not going to do your time for you or with you. I will not let you jackpot me and send me to prison for your actions. This is understood.

The police union has an obligation to defend officers and not waste the members’ resources by publicly and arrogantly condoning unquestionably damaging behavior, which compromises the whole department’s credibility. A policeman has a fiduciary duty to supply the union with actions they can defend but not to the detriment of the union members, the police department, and the whole legal structure.

The actual thin blue line and honor among officers is not to ruin or let a fellow officer get jackpotted on your dime. United we stand separately we fall so that others are left standing. The primary offender should accept the brunt of the burden to alleviate as much as possible on the remaining policemen. That is the real code.

The union has a responsibility to protect the union body above an individual member, understanding that one must sometimes answer so that others may serve without contempt. However, refusing the obvious accountability disparages the union’s principles and, by association, the principles of your union members that paints the good officers with a bloody brush. When these policemen’s actions do not give you anything to work with, you must save the ship instead of circling the wagons.

The righteous needs of the many outweigh the detrimental actions of the few. But, if they blow it so badly, then you must step away and condemn their actions even if by absentee proxy of removing your unwavering defense, if not your conditional support.

How many of your members agree with having their dues spent for this? How many good OFFICERS have to suffer as a whole nationally with the public perception that you promote? When you, good and bad, wear the same respected uniform, it is hard to tell from the outside looking in, but you know from the inside, the good from the bad.

The decision must be made among the ranks, the bosses, the prosecutors, and the judges but mostly the street cops on the front line who are the most vulnerable not to allow members to tarnish them by criminal behavior because you become silently complicit by aiding and abetting that as well. The street cops surely suffer the consequences most.

When the union sees no evil and the union staunchly proclaims with arrogant indifference their support for crimes such as this, they tolerate it by demonstration and proclamation. Then, the only logical conclusion left is that this could be an undetected RICO violation of an ongoing culture of a criminal enterprise with known collaborators and tolerance for criminal activity and corruption.

It invites investigations and attention. But, at the very least, it is a poor demonstration of leadership that endangers law enforcement and promotes an insidious culture waiting to implode again.

We know what it should say about Chauvin, but what does it really say about those who would defend this public assassination. Who can be proud of this abomination or defend its despicable representation as good policing? What manner of twisted articulation can justify these four policemen’s actions?

Why the extraordinary efforts to justify this behavior and claim that these actions were necessary and legal? Why lose all credibility to represent the other members by supporting these actions? Did these actions meet departmental expectations, and are they representative of what a police union and police department can be proud of?

If they did not fear for their actions, they should not fear having it called for what it is and suffer the consequences. At its core, it is murder by all standards for all involved, which should come with extended stay, room, and board, complimentary amenities, free utilities, plenty of company, and lifetime membership for Chauvin should also be included.

More specifically, extensive prison time for violations of all four levels of accountability and serious deterrents must be imposed. The success of any conviction is not in assessing the highest charges but in dispensing the most prison time to be served. At the Judge’s discretion, sentences should run consecutive, meaning one after another, which means maximum prison time.

Local, national, and global outrage has been agitated to condemn this vile murder, while some would defend this evil at enormous cost claiming support of law enforcement or Mr. Floyd’s non-compliance. This is not racial, black or white, but human. He was a human being with a family and loved ones whose actions did not rise to the level of what we all witnessed.

It should never be witnessed or suffered again. If this were done to an animal, the depravity would be apparent and the outrage universal, or would you prefer that this happen to other men, women, and juveniles as justified standard police operating procedures, especially over minor offenses.

Police procedure and conduct are what is on trial. So why hasn’t the ongoing protest, property destruction, billions of dollars in resources and lost productivity, racial division, and decay of law enforcement respect, safety, and morale not been enough to admonish the actions of one man’s barbaric casual act of murder?

Remember, this is all over a counterfeit twenty-dollar bill, and the question must be asked was it worth it?. If you need any further guidance on if it was worth it, the City of Minneapolis just gave 27 million reasons why it wasn’t.

Thurston K. Atlas

Creating A Buzz

George Floyd Part 2 of 3- Logical Reasoning



Facts & Questions

Sometimes you must go backwards to retrace and unravel an incident, then proceed forward to a place of clarity. A review or reenactment from the end of the critical incident that claimed Mr. George Floyd’s life analyzed in retrospect will reveal the points incriminating to all parties involved based on the visual evidence and factual inference of the application of the law.

An examination from the end to the beginning of the encounter is a very distinct way to isolate the mental State of mind, the Mens Rea, or intent, so it is legally established. The criminality, the mea culpa or fault, can be best demonstrated by everyone’s actual actions or inactions at critical times according to legal standards.

Were these actions justifiable based upon what was known at the time, what should have been known, or what was being observed throughout that time? Was it within the law and police procedure or a violation? Does the action’s justification rise to the level of its application to the circumstances? Was it legally necessary and permissible? The answers all serve as actual testimony to the facts.

According to the law, inaction can also be an action when there was a duty to act. If there was inaction, was there a duty to act? What action should have been taken, and how could that action have affected the outcome? As a fluid evolving situation, the timing and chronological sequence matter greatly to the incident’s legality and outcome. Diligent analysis of the timing and sequence will reveal crucial determinations of criminality and culpability.

 Our method will state the facts as we believe them to be accurate and then ask the pertinent questions raised. Finally, in Part 3, we will examine the answers by deductive reasoning of the legal application of the law and police departmental policy and procedures, analyzing and suggesting the obvious logical resolutions and interpretations.

Facts: Mr. Floyd, while in handcuffs, was surrounded by four policemen and physically restrained by at least three of them at different times during the incident. He was removed from the scene by responding EMTs on a stretcher, presumably lifeless by all appearances. He was then transported to the hospital by the EMT unit.

Questions: Who radioed in for medical assistance, and at what point during the incident? How many policemen involved spoke with radio regarding medical aid, the reason for the request for EMT, and if requests were made to step up their arrival due to Mr. Floyd’s physical decline? When stating Mr. Floyd’s condition, was there any mention of Chauvin on his neck restricting his breathing? Was that due to an omission or concealment? What was said during the radio transmission? What do the dispatcher recordings and separate notes reflect?

When was a supervisor notified, and by whom did any policemen involved make notifications to advise command? Were there recorded specialized channels that communicated more sensitive information? Did that happen, by whom, and at what time? Were they recorded and reviewed if such secure channel communications took place and reviewed as they most likely should have been pursued by discovery or duces tecum?

What were EMT’s dispatched communications? At what point did the EMTs determine that Mr. Floyd had no vital signs indicating death? Was it before transport, during transport, or at the hospital by medical personnel? What life-saving steps did the EMT’s take, and how did Mr. Floyd respond? Once at the hospital, what life-saving steps were taken, for how long, and by who. What was the information given by the EMTs, are their paperwork and interviews complete and consistent with this information, and when was Mr. Floyd’s actual pronouncement of death?

Were there real-time 911 calls from the public as the critical incident occurred, and how many? What was the content of the policemen’s excited utterances as excited utterances by any party are generally admissible in court as evidence of knowledge or intent? When was the location secured and treated as a crime scene with the Use of Deadly Force Team or Homicide Unit notified to respond on the scene? Was deadly force protocol initiated and maintained, specifically the separation of policemen and preventing collaboration of statements before interviews? Was witness identification and statements gathered?

Facts: The primary policeman later been identified as Chauvin, an 18-year veteran of the force and the senior officer on the scene. Mr. Floyd was pinned to the ground by his neck by Chauvin’s left knee and left front shin area applied to the carotid nerve or artery area of the neck traversing the windpipe, trachea, and larynx.

The carotid artery is located on both sides of the neck. It does not matter which way Mr. Floyd’s head was turned. It would still be exposed. Also, the greater torque or twist of the head, the greater the vulnerability of this neck artery to causing unconsciousness or a fatal outcome. It restricts oxygen and blood flow simultaneously. This restriction occurred for an estimated 8 minutes and 46 seconds, of which approximately 2 minutes and 53 seconds Mr. Floyd was unresponsive, presumably unconscious, and probably deceased.

Despite public outcry, repeated warnings expressing concern from fellow officers, and Mr. Floyd’s very own plea Chauvin continued to apply pressure with his total body weight on Mr. Floyd’s neck. The force continuum scale governs police use of force and justifies what type of force is permitted. Code red is the highest level of threat and response category. Any neck restraint classifies as a code red on the force continuum scale, which categorizes the severity of its use as deadly force.

With code red being the highest threat level assessment, the resulting response can only be to preserve life or avoid serious bodily harm but not gain compliance. Any neck restraint is considered deadly force whether used against a policeman or used by a policeman. Due to the deadly force used on Mr. Floyd, it is very likely to have caused or contributed to his death and inflicted serious physical harm upon him. Thus, the necessity or articulation for its use is a problematic violation from its initiation and certainly its continuation.  

Reiterating that he was handcuffed hands behind his back, prone on the ground with four policemen surrounding him already searched and determined to be free of weapons. These circumstances do not support a code red response and neck restraint regardless of however applied. Therefore, it is not and cannot be justified according to the force continuum scale. 

There is, however, no dispute that Mr. Floyd’s death was caused on the scene before EMT arrived, with Chauvin’s neck restraint a factor. Without Chauvin’s knee as a factor, it would suggest that whatever other factors that contributed to Mr. Floyd’s death, he would have succumbed to them at that very moment anyway without Chauvin’s use of excessive force. 

The State certifies the Police Academy and dictates the training criteria and curriculum, which extensively covers the use of force. The City swears in the cadets to become officers, they have the ultimate legal liability and extensively covers the use of force. Technically, the use of force can be shots fired down to as minor as placing someone in handcuffs without incident voluntarily and with utmost cooperation.

The City gives the authority to arrest for misdemeanors and issue citations. The State gives the authority for deadly force and felony arrest, which is why you go to County Court for State charges. Although the State gives you the authority to use deadly force, the City is responsible for that force and subsequent training once the police are sworn in.

 By all standards applied both State and City, force of any kind must be the minimal force necessary to effect an arrest. Thus, force should discontinue proportionately as resistance lessens or it is no longer necessary. But in this instance, it becomes clear it was unnecessary to effect an arrest or gain compliance when Chauvin has his hand in his pocket, and there was no need to use his hands to control Mr. Floyd.

Questions: The question then becomes, was the knee justified in the first place based on the criteria for its use? If he had been a code red threat at any point, what level of threat did he present once he was unresponsive and feared unconscious or deceased?

Once Chauvin’s knee was on his neck constituting deadly force, at what point was Mr. Floyd not a code red threat or actively resisting with the threat of death or serious bodily harm to anyone? Was there any discernable level of threat or fear of any kind with four officers present, and Chauvin’s hands in his pockets while his knee was on Mr. Floyd’s neck? 

Would the threat level seem under control and become suspect when policemen feel comfortable enough to turn their back and not be engage otherwise if any threat existed? Was Mr. Floyd allowed to comply, and were there verbal commands and instructions issued for compliance? Had compliance and control already effectively been achieved when three officers had only secondary participation? 

Were Mr. Floyd’s pleadings not an opportunity to ease the use of deadly force. Maybe issue orders to comply following a clear indication of his willingness to comply. But, instead, they disregarded their responsibility and duty to discontinue or cause to be discontinued the use of force absent his resistance or its necessity.

Despite all the concerns about Mr. Floyd’s medical condition expressed before Mr. Floyd laid lifeless, what threat to four policemen’s life or limb was Floyd with his hands cuffed behind his back prone on the ground on his stomach? If we believe their concern for Mr. Floyd’s medical condition, wouldn’t their actions be even more baffling?

With Chauvin on his neck, when did Chauvin order him to comply, or more importantly, what chance did Chauvin give him to comply? Even unresponsive with no pulse, the use of deadly force was not altered to the level of Mr. Floyd’s lack of ability to resist or actual resistance, nor was there any possibly life-saving officer intervention. 

Was a taser, pepper spray, verbal persuasion, or other compliance techniques or less-lethal option available? Why did Chauvin eventually take his knee off Mr. Floyd’s neck? Was it because Mr. Floyd was unresponsive, or Chauvin had killed him? No, that is unlikely because that had already apparently happened minutes before. It was confirmed by no pulse being felt by another policeman. Was the EMT’s arrival the only thing that finally prompted him to remove himself off of Mr. Floyd’s neck?

Aren’t illegal orders and criminal actions to be disobeyed and not participated in or furthered in addition to expectations to be prevented? Isn’t it understood and enforced in any military or quasi-military organization, including the police?

Is it not your vow and commitment to uphold the law and not break it? The movie A Few Good Men is a prime example. You should have done something and had a duty to stop it but did not. If you had intervened, maybe even after Mr. Floyd was unresponsive, could he have been still alive or potentially revived?

 

 

 

Would Mr. Floyd more likely have survived if not for his encounter with Chauvin’s knee? If we cannot say yes for sure that Chauvin was the cause of Mr. Floyd’s death, then we cannot say no either for sure? Can it be denied that the fact is three officers had a duty to step in and stop it, but they did nothing? Instead of intervening at various life-saving points, did they not aid and abet in the murder by either actively assisting or providing protection and crowd neutralization to deter citizen intervention?

Facts: Mr. Floyd is stretched out prone on the ground, handcuffed with hands behind his back face down after being placed there. Prior to being placed on the ground, Mr. Floyd was resistant to being placed in the squad car.

Questions: Were the duration and events which occurred while placed face down on the ground the best course of action or option available, or an indication of indifference to unnecessary use of force? 

Was standing him alongside the squad car or maintaining the position of him being partially in the squad car more preferable given his level of resistance?

What were all policemen’s roles in attempting to get him into the squad car and removing him, placing him on the ground? Whose decision was it to place him prone, and why if he was almost entirely in the squad car?

At what point did they each participate in the chronological order of events and why? Was there a detectable amount of frustration or agitation from the policemen towards Mr. Floyd? Was the reasonableness and level of force used lawful and necessary? 

Facts: The foundation of the law is what was known or reasonably suspected at the time. It governs probable cause and reasonable suspicion from the Constitution and Bill of Rights down to municipal law enforcement and policemen conduct. The history of the policemen involved was not known at the time, just as Mr. Floyd’s history presumably was not known at the time either.

Their histories have no bearing on considering the facts and motivations known at that time, not overriding any action that occurred then. The prevailing influence of histories consistently demonstrates a propensity to act according to a previous pattern, a reluctance exhibited to refrain from an activity, or implied tendencies during an incident. Histories are indications of conduct consistency and by no means restrictive of any number of actions or responses, both positive or negative, demonstrated which are inconsistent with that history.  

Mr. Floyd’s criminal history reveals no prior consistency of code red behavior towards police personnel. Also, after the fact consideration for the two rookie policemen’s lack of history bears no mitigating circumstances to avoid accountability but may indicate their experience but not their lack of knowledge regarding appropriate force. Histories are indicators but not always relevant implications that can be related to a current incident. It also has to be presumed that Chauvin’s alleged previous racial undertones must be considered equally as Mr. Floyd’s run-ins with the law if histories are a factor.

Questions: Why would Mr. Floyd’s history be unfavorable for him, but the history of the four officers not be unfavorable for them if so revealed? So are we to assume the history of the two veteran policemen is disregarded, the history of the two rookie policemen taken into consideration for clemency, but Mr. Floyd’s history held against him?

How could the unknown history at the time somehow indicate that Mr. Floyd needed treatment as a code red level threat in this incident? 

If Mr. Floyd’s history were unknown at the time of the encounter, what bearing could it have on the incident? If he were a priest, what relevance would that have on the incident if unknown, none? How could the incident not be a judgment on the actions of the participants at the time, which would render histories after the fact as irrelevancies?

Facts: The policemen walked Mr. Floyd across the street without incident, and he seemed to have some minor passive resistance but not actively aggressive behavior. He was handcuffed with minimal resistance and without incident or struggle. Mr. Floyd’s action upon being removed from the vehicle would not constitute resisting arrest or being combative. Therefore, it did not meet the physical standard or required warnings to cease and desist or placed under arrest for resisting.

It appeared he was confused and more verbally resistant, attempting to have explained to him what was going on and turning to talk but definitely not combative. Officers said that they noticed a concerning level of distress upon handcuffing Mr. Floyd.

Questions: Before being removed from the car, was Mr. Floyd adequately advised as to what the encounter was concerning? After showing signs of distress during handcuffing, why was Mr. Floyd even taken across the street at all? If Mr. Floyd was showing signs of distress, why was he placed on the ground face down? If Mr. Floyd showed signs of distress, why did Chauvin place his knee on his neck, further complicating his distress? What was observed, and what physical signs and indications conveyed that was concerning? What, how, and when were the signs escalating, indicating decline? 

If Mr. Floyd showed signs of distress, at what point was this radioed in, and with four officers present, what assistance was he given? Is it prudent or customary to further restrict someone’s breathing if distress is suspected? Was there a belief that Chauvin’s weight on Mr. Floyd’s neck was in any way assisting him and a benefit to his distress? Was the delay in requesting medical attention from the initial suspicion before bringing him across the street justified, or the whole distress story a fabrication to cover the cause of his death?

What should have been the policemen’s response? Was there any reason for any delay in offering assistance, requesting EMT, or removing Chauvin off the neck of what you have stated was an obviously medically distressed person? If Mr. Floyd showed signs of distress, what distress signs were radio notified of to better inform the EMT dispatcher of the progression of his symptoms other than a grown man being on his neck? 

Imagine suspecting he was having a heart attack. Would you place him on his stomach with an over 200-pound man on his neck? Why was no aid rendered or attempted during his distress after he displayed no pulse? After displaying no pulse, did the other officers feel it was a lawful and necessary use of force for Chauvin to remain on Mr. Floyd’s neck?

Facts: The policemen responded to a counterfeit twenty-dollar bill passed at the store and received information that directed them to Mr. Floyd across the street. Almost immediately upon approach, the policeman escalates the situation by unnecessarily pulling his gun, revealing his disposition that Mr. Floyd knew it was a counterfeit bill. His demeanor was to prevent an escape or assume a threat level fearful enough to pull his service weapon, but why? You cannot just draw your gun on someone for a conversation. Was there a visible threat, or what justified this approach?

Questions: Was the twenty-dollar bill marked and taken as evidence prior to approaching Mr. Floyd? Did they know the counterfeit protocol of notifying the Secret Service and recording the individual’s information to be forwarded in a report? Should they have known counterfeiting is a federal crime and is only arrestable by a federal agent or by prior federal authorization? Finally, did they know that they lacked the authority to arrest him without providing he knew that it was counterfeit? 

Subsequently, was the counterfeit money found to have Mr. Floyd’s DNA or prints on it confirming after his death that he had indeed possessed the fake? Could they or did they know if Mr. Floyd had knowledge that it was counterfeit or how he obtained it?

Aren’t the Secret Service only interested in printing operations and patterns, not random twenty-dollar bills in which they cannot prove knowledge or intent? With authority to investigate but not arrest, why was any force at all used? Is it common knowledge that counterfeit money is in public circulation and could conceivably fall into the unsuspecting hand of any law-abiding citizen unbeknownst to them?  

Is there a point where the crime does not justify the force used or even handcuffing for a nonviolent cold stand or questioning? Can the actions leading to his death be justified compared to the nature of the crime, the public danger posed, or threats posed endangering the policemen’s safety? Was Mr. Floyd’s race a factor in the handling of this incident? Were the other policemen in fear of Chauvin or his reputation? Would a conversation, patience, or verbal persuasion have been more suitable, and is it also taught as a tool for law enforcement?

Reverse engineering of the circumstance and events reveals the highest contrast in logical continuity between what actually happened and what is said to have happened. Often when constructing a fabrication, it cannot pass the scrutiny of reverse analysis. It is constructed to make the pieces fit conceptually in a progression that only lends itself to conventional rationale, not in-depth questioning. The contemplation of why something would be necessary if the previous assertion is true becomes an evident contradiction. If it were true, it would be no need for the subsequent action.

For example, if they had honestly thought Mr. Floyd was experiencing distress before his death, why would Chauvin continue his behavior, or they allow it. It stands more to reason that they needed to conceal something and quickly falsified an implausible explaination that contradicts their prior assertions, actions, and the chronological sequence of events.

Their explanation leaves them exposed in too many areas lacking justification to be accurate. Moreover, it blatantly illuminates that if what they said were true, then countermeasures would not have been necessary, or otherwise, their action could not have been consistent with their initial assertion.

All indications are that their concern was for exposure from Chauvin’s reckless and willful misconduct, which left them assessing what they were part and parcel of was improper. Mr. Floyd needing medical attention could only be exacerbated by the distress inflicted upon him by Chauvin and their inaction. 

Now that the illumination of contradictions has been identified by the questions raised, then deductive conclusions of guilt can be examined and proven. Furthermore, did the punishment fit the crime or did the tactics fit the situation? Keep in mind even self-defense only allows for the force that neutralizes a threat and not beyond the danger posed.     

 

Thurston K. Atlas

Creating A Buzz

Crimes Against Humanity The Extended Reality



Hard but True, Raw but Real

Let’s get down to business removed from the political correctness and pretense of social graces to speak openly without regard for contrived moral consciousness, forced remorse, or unwilling accountability.

Instead, let‘s put everything on the table out in the open to analyze everything regarding present and future projections regarding racism and discrimination.

Strictly speaking, it is a culmination of psychological conditioning, economic exploitation, and opposed interest which stubbornly continues similar to an addiction to delusion. The delusional obsession is to an entitlement of preferential accommodations and self-image of superior character selfishly pursued at the expense of all others not in your identifying group.

Blacks seemed suitable and were easily identified by their dark skin tone for exclusion. Your subgroup sustaining a subculture of suppression while claiming to be above all groups of animals and humans at the self-proclaimed pinnacle of the biological chain.

Thereby elevating your subgroup above all others by standing hoisted high upon your artificially privileged advantage, looming above all creation. It is like the great Oz, who was not the all-powerful portrayed but a sniveling insecure little round man hiding behind a curtain of vulnerability pretending to be invincible. This created great fear and respect as long as the curtain remained closed.

Pulling the curtain back reveals the fear and inadequacies that lead to the need for and continuation of this façade. Without this belief and confronted by reality, the acceptance of no such advantage before God or man means the masquerade is up. This creates the stubborn need to refuse to relinquish that idea because it is the core of your being, your identity.

It is shocking to your core and psychologically devastating to deny the foundation of your beliefs despite overwhelming evidence that it is not valid. Further, to admit your atrocities committed to cheating your way to the top is inconceivable to the psyche, so the ramifications are minimized.

That only leaves one alternative: denying its benefits and doing everything to keep it going; otherwise, the image is shattered, and so are you. It then becomes a desperation of survival where racism and discrimination must continue. To remove them would be symbolically likened to removing your air, but literally, your attitude of superiority is closely followed by its advantages.

Furthermore, the diminishing of your future demographic advantage brought about by fewer babies born per family while you are ambitiously pursuing wealth and careers. Finally, considering inter-racial relationships of all kinds, sexual alternatives without procreation, and the death of staunch racist ideological individuals over time lends itself to a bleak racist demographic projection.

The continuation of this projection is not favorable to the white male dominancy of society. The white male historically had no consideration for anyone, including the white female, with one exception: inclusion when and to the degree that you were needed to sustain their position.

Now their reckless actions have had unintended results that have undermined the very purpose they sought to preserve. Now it is a crisis of survival thirty to fifty years down the road from now. Change has long been set in motion, and change is coming. Adaptation to change has always been the key to survival, and survival reliant upon cooperation within the species.

I am not under the illusion that racism is about to end anytime soon but will allow for the whimsical notion that the ideological DNA of some individuals bent on racism or their survival dependent on racism may abandon it.

The glacier shift of the racist collective to be persuaded of the benefit for themselves in changing their unjust perspectives, the closer integration of racial identifiers and similarities, the demise of bigots, and discouragement by the punitive connotations attached are the mitigating factors for change.

There is no easy way to say it and no need to sugar coat it in the context of history if judged by the last hundred years and the next hundred years. A little over a hundred years ago, in 1906, it was acceptable to daily put a black pigmy named Ota Benga in a cage with monkeys in the Bronx Zoo on display to visually convince the public of the animalistic nature and close proximity of blacks to animals.

This undoubtedly contributed to his eventual suicide but definitely even more lasting was the effect it must have had on whites who witnessed it. The New York Times wrote in support of this barbarity as basic eugenics on displaying the missing link for perpetuating myths and stereotypes to be taken as fact.

There can be no misconception that there have always been decent and compassionate whites who have denounced slavery, racism, and discrimination. Over time their numbers have increased to the present multi-race coalition in solidarity with blacks about the horrendous treatment endured with the necessity to end it and install equality.

It is an advantage and privilege that they do not want or need at the immoral expense of other human beings. The key to committing these atrocities is to devalue, reduce, and dehumanize your victims to a deserving or irrelevant position unworthy of empathy or compassion. But the question then becomes who appointed you to make such a determination.

You see, that is where religion and other forms of reinforcement and repetition are applied to believe and validate anything to defend and promote their belief, no matter how sanctimonious and preposterous the justification may be.

The elements of this twisted reality are a classic example of schizophrenic behavior, where their self-perceived contradiction to and diversion from reality morphs into a nightmarish fragmentation permitting unthinkable behavior and lack of willful remorse, making it easy to repeat.

The extreme aggression, savage demeanor, and arrogant defense of the atrocities committed under the guise of conservative Christian values go without saying that they would appear to be contrary to any actions a Christian not suffering from extreme mental illness would ever commit. 

Compound that by its pervasive nature, and it reveals a group brainwashing seemingly under demonic psychological indoctrination resulting in mental slavery to racism powerless to resist its destructive programming. 

A programmed compulsion of righteous evil and disregard for actions expecting no consequences. The portrayal of blacks as savage, dangerous, sexual predators, stupid, animalistic, and the list goes on and on serves to conceal the depravity of the accuser when their actions are compared against the accused.

The racial slur “coon” has its origins in hunting and killing human beings for fun. How could the indiscriminate murder, enslavement, beatings, and rape of blacks not be more indicative of the savage provoking tendencies of whites claiming to be civilized? Now, who has demonstrated the absolute savage and animalistic predator actions of a barbaric inclination if not whites?

The transference of these ghastly behaviors, which are identifiably one-sided against blacks, serves as the propaganda-driven denial of the racist incubation reflected by whites without concealment. Just educate yourself on the extent and practices to better understand both sides’ journey and current condition.

Rejection of the facts may be the only way to align yourself with the insanity and brutal reality blacks have faced at the hand of whites in this country. The dehumanizing realization of white atrocities is understandably frightening to whites wondering how people can be treated so viciously and still stand for the flag, defend the country, and endure the bullshit.

Patriotism is the current code for allegiance to inequality and misplaced blame on others for actions and disappointments resulting from your own miscalculations. Exclusively claim to be the only guardians of patriotism has resulted in an erosion of its principles by the mangling of its meaning, application, and demonstration.

Forced adherence to your manipulation of superiority into patriotism on anyone who does not look like you has had the effect of creating resistance to something which was never a point of contention. It has always been inequality.

The current fervor of voting rights is more aligned with voter suppression than voter fraud because the day has passed when you could regulate an outcome of the election, as evidenced by the election of former President Obama.

The will of the people’s vote cannot be calibrated to assure victory for you, so it must be suppressed against you. The Voting Rights Act of 1965 would not have been enacted if it were not needed in response to racism and voter suppression. Whites agreed that this was the case, and countermeasures had to be explicitly implemented to ensure that the target of these oppressions, blacks, had judicial protections for voting.

So, it would stand to fact and reason that neither the Civil War nor the Emancipation Proclamation abolished the slavery mentality. The ratification of the 13th Amendment in 1865 abolished slavery, but it then transitioned into Jim Crow and blatant systemic prejudices.

One hundred years after the Civil War ended, the need for legislation was a recognition that racism, voter suppression, and discrimination were still the Jim Crow law of the land. It would then be counterintuitive that discrimination and oppression had continued beyond the Civil War, but sadly, very true it had.

Affirmative action and similar actions would not be if these ongoing oppressions ended when some claim. But, unfortunately, many have continued despite these alleged remedies. It is an affront to decency to have the unmitigated gall to whimper about reverse discrimination and unfairness of opportunity allocations and access based solely on race designed to alleviate the disadvantages systematically imposed upon others by you.

To deny fairness to others by declaring your plight of unfairness and inequality is to either proclaim yourself stupid, irrational, or a racist. I would like to think the best of you and, given the benefit of the doubt, assume that you are simply irrational.

The overt discrimination and exclusion practiced have been solely based upon race, but to bemoan your suffering by the inclusion of others while crying about opportunities you had readily denied others exceeds an elevated threshold of irrationality.

To be held liable is not discriminatory or discretionary but should be expected. Cancel culture cannot be used for absolution to ignore your culpability granting blanket immunity oblivious to your actions.

It is deemed unfair by a cry of cancel culture regarding white’s accountability for their transgression when facing societal condemnation or discontinuation of patronage. Drawing the line and adopting unpleasant consequences by withdrawing voluntary support is not an obligation owed to the offender but a right of the offended.

White males lack the credibility to complain. They have always been on the till with improper privilege subsidized on the public draw. Their hand in the cookie jar and thumb on the scale of justice. They value freedom, prosperity, and fairness exclusively for themselves and are quick to complain when their expectation of preferential treatment is not met.

It is ridiculous to insist that such monumental injustices be swept under the rug while even the slightest rebuke of your privilege is exaggerated to an intolerable injustice. Stop it. They don’t make rugs or exaggerations that huge. This strategy to alienate yourselves from blame by denying your privilege by claiming victimization again contradicts the historical facts of your actions.

The mentality and benefits are so great that some would masquerade themselves as part of the Confederate heritage. One is born in Canada of Cuban descent and named Rafael as Texas Ted to Americanize his image for easier assimilation into the good ole boy’s club.

Could you imagine the difference in perception between Rafael Cruz and Ted? Another would claim his Confederate membership even though his lineage is German. The drumpf clan, whose real fortune is that his grandfather was exiled from his native land for draft dodging returning to America where he had fled.

Neither of these persons’ American lineage extends beyond their grandparents at best. Nonetheless, they have claims of their Confederate heroes and heritage. But white skin, anglicized name changes, and cultural adaptation allowed them to assimilate and minimize if not avoid racial discrimination.

This is the lure of white privilege while distancing themselves from their true heritage and diverting attention from themselves by ostracizing others and denouncing immigrants when their families are not too far removed from the immigration tree.

What better to illustrate a reversed crab-in-the-barrel mentality? Instead of franticly keeping them in, they keep them out, designating more assurance of privilege for themselves. A sort of all-in-the-family of preferential treatment requiring adaptation of Confederacy biases.

White skin alone is the prominent inclusion factor, with prejudice is a bonus. MAGA is an adaptation of the make Germany great again philosophy used by Hitler in his rise to power and espousal of white privilege in a maniacal pursuit.

Tell a big enough lie enough times very loudly over prolonged periods that the people will not only believe it but accept it as the truth was Hitler’s mantra. These same tactics are familiar tactics of American Republican politics and ideology today, raising the question that if the nostalgic return to a MAGA time was possible, then what time would that be.

Would it be a time for lynching, coon hunting, forced labor, or any other litany of atrocities since there was never a time when they did not exist in America? What elements of slavery and discrimination would be preferable?

Are these the conservative Christian values we are to return to, as demonstrated by history? Lesser forms of expressing these values are still present. Unfortunately, the Republican party has been maligned with acceptance and promotion of these aspirations by association with MAGA principles.

If not a return to slavery, the continual furtherance of white privilege by the dehumanization and discrimination of blacks specifically and minorities in general, now to even include the poor. Let’s call it what it is, and you should say what you mean.

No further proof that America is off the rails realistically beyond redemption than half the elected officials refuse to denounce an insurrection or exclaim that it is wrong to murder a black man by choking him out in broad daylight placing your knee on his neck.

There is plenty more, but what more do we need. Refusal to condemn and reject these actions actually condones them. The reason why they are acceptable is that it furthers your agenda. If a dog had been choked out, Republicans would have been outraged because it does not further their agenda, and their estimation of the dog is above the dehumanization felt for blacks.

Do you for one second think they care about unarmed blacks being killed and sprayed with bullets as long as it is understood that, for example, whites storming the Capitol are not to be treated like the n-word. Only one shot fired, but a black can be fired up multiple times in the back. No precautionary show of force or mass arrest, but some would still ask what disparity?

Not condoning or requesting a violent response but simply highlighting the disparity that seemingly can only be based on race. What happened to the stance of when the looting starts, the shooting starts?

On Capitol Hill, where an overwhelmingly almost exclusive mob of whites attempted to overthrow the government in the ultimate act of looting, there was less enforcement than if a Nike store was being looted. Furthermore, the outcry is deafening from those being held accountable.

Can you imagine their shock and indignation at being called to answer for the very attempt to overthrow the government? What is this country coming to when whites are being arrested for being patriots to the Confederacy? Amazingly, Blacks are even expecting equality and redress?

The discrepancies of response and expectation change when blacks are involved with the law unequally applied or by anyone even expecting it to be applied equally. How can one unarmed black be more of a fear-provoking threat and intolerance than a whole mob of insurrectionists?

The justification for Capitol Hill law enforcement restraint was praised, while questionable articulation for using deadly force against unarmed blacks is not condemned. Not advocating for less respect for white lives but equal respect for black lives.

There has to be a comprehensive understanding, standard, and application of the law that does not give carte blanche for law enforcement misconduct and abuse of citizens.

Qualified immunity must have clear objective parameters where protections are no longer enjoyed and resources expended for disqualifying conduct. Law and order, crime and punishment, as well as wrongdoing and judgment, must fall unabated on the actions committed and the person who committed them, not the exemption of their guilt by race or profession.

 

 

The guilty deed is tethered to the guilty’s name if integrity is to be maintained; otherwise, it occasionally and eventually will lead to some feeling they are left with no choice but to resist detriment. When left with no choice, the choice is then made clear. While police are necessary, their actions cannot be above the law simply because they are essential and less likely to impact a white person adversely.

By the same indication, police interactions are negatively exaggerated; citizens are emotionally inflamed and apprehensively predisposed. This reflects the reverberations from injustices and perceptions that influence citizen’s cooperation and politeness.

The point is that a recalibration needs to occur on both sides, but the abuses of authority are not immune to the adjustments required to improve interactions. On the contrary, the submission to injustices brings about a greater dissatisfaction and a resistance that escalates into a more hazardous condition for all concerned. On the other hand, mutual respect deescalates conflict and promotes cooperation.

What encourages resistance, divisiveness, and danger is injustice, racism, and despair. The cause and effect are apparent, and the dismay at the resulting outrage is disingenuous, and of course, based on if it is happening to you. A plea for solidarity healing society only becomes an objective when you are not making the concessions or the balance of power has shifted away.

Only, if you stand to lose or lost something, it would have been better and more convincing had that been your mantra when you had the leadership influence. Now the tables have turned, the plea for bipartisanship is uttered, and the priority of moving forward together healing a fractured country at a fragile time is encouraged at our disadvantage.

Renovations are always best when you are already working on improvements requiring one cleanup. Suggesting that grievances are delayed for the good of the whole would somehow benefit us is contrary when your concern was and has been to benefit only yourself.

So many times in the past, this conciliatory posture has only resulted in a delay, not improvement proving to be a sadistic prank time and time again. So, suppose this is truly a time of healing and bipartisan cooperation. In that case, the Republican leadership should try to cast at least one bipartisan vote as a sign of their sincerity.

Extending the olive branch for once instead of demanding concessions to conform against conventional wisdom and our best interest. Having exhausted all your deceitful persuasions, your advantage by inequality has run its course leaving you fearful of the void. There is plenty of work to be done and time is squandered not resolving the issues that can and will no longer be silently suffered.

The accumulated depletion of will and resources will not accomplish your objective since your preference is not the only consideration to be considered. Compromise and cooperation can not be adverse abstract principles. They are the way forward. You can not persist in taking pride in obstruction and destruction to exert a futile exercise of power.

History is undefeated and has proven that resistance to change and stubborn ill-fated indecision has led to obsolete power and doomed existence. The arrogance of America will not let it recognize that there have been many demises of world power among nations based on the civil disorder and refusals to make changes.

The societal collapse is often preceded by extreme economic instability and fluctuations, infrastructure and labor deterioration, hunger and chaos, and then governmental collapse. Balance and equilibrium are universal laws, and imbalance by its nature is unstable and prone to collapse. Due to the imbalances of racism and oppression, societies worldwide are now wobbling.

Now the question is which will come first, the change or the collapse? I do not believe it will be changed because of its opposition and the universal foundation of deceit it has taken to last this long. It is collapsing under its own weight of deception and denial. Think about a celestial gravitational collapse that occurs due to the contraction of its own weight or pulls inward, succumbing to disorder.

Why is America exempt from collapsing from contraction resisting the harmony and order of the universe or God’s will? No need to look to the sky since history and anthropology can confirm the earthly demise of civilizations that once had great power. The turmoil of the year 2020 was a premonition that cannot be survived repeatedly, especially with the tailwinds still being felt.

Progress and transformation to form a more perfect union not defined or restricted by the past is the way forward. Those who long for the past are afraid of the future. Uncertain of their prospects and secure with the status quo without regard for advancement but clinging to stagnation to prolong their significance.

By nature, the young become old, and the old gives way to the new. This country was built on racism and the surpluses from black labor. Vast wealth and resources have been accumulated and shielded from blacks without question. Can there be any further denial of that? Should there be a recognition of that in words and redress? Damages can not be undone or life restored, but mending can be pursued.

Since I have stated my pessimism or realism about significant change not being forthcoming, let me just express what could or should happen. The first restorative action which will have the most significant impact is to cease and desist the nonsense, to just knock it off. Despite all the lives lost and mangled, the economic inflictions have had far more reaching implications than the murders.

Personally, more apologies, ineffective methods, or promises are not needed. The deaths caused and atrocities committed cannot be rescinded, but the wealth benefits denied can be recuperated like when stolen artifacts are returned. The government, businesses, and institutions should pursue more than conversational remedies since they received real monetary benefits. Money would be a suitable substitute for words.

Financial is not the only form of payment, and the government should not be the only payer but make no mistake, slavery was about the benjamins, so the benjamins need to be paid.

Services are the most likely form of payment that only require tendering the services, terms, or business you already provide, such as free higher educational opportunities. Generations of descendants of slave owners have benefited greatly from what they established to pay it forward for their ancestors.

The primary distribution would be opportunity, development, and investments but mainly just stop the bullshit for us to receive a fair shake. Since no white person today has owned a single slave, it seems only reasonable. But, they most certainly are recipients of racist privilege, enjoyed the restrictions levied, or been enriched by the bias practices so entrenched in American society.

So it is not unfair that someone else would get a fair shot after your road has been paved by discrimination. Forty acres and a mule was the unfulfilled promise, and eliminating discrimination still a dilemma, but economic viability and sustainable resources are the reparations now required.

The Civil War basically set the parameters for economic profit-sharing the way the American Revolution did, only domestically this time. As a result, the north received a more equitable distribution of the profits and a more sensible voluntary method of extracting the surplus of exploitative profits from black labor based on black’s lack of options and suppressed conditions. The south received the ability to continue operating as usual with the adaptation of the new extraction method, supposedly voluntary labor with slightly lower profit margins.

They both received plausible deniability. The dehumanizing treatment was pretty much the same, and freed blacks still worked on the plantation scratching out a living at the master’s behest only now the new and improved way of debauchery was called Jim Crow.

The Industrial Revolution beginning in 1860, greatly influenced the end of legal slavery and the most likely cause of its abolition because it transitioned from sole dependence on human labor to machine labor.

It created new models of efficiency and manufacturing, making the old slave model obsolete, but it did not eliminate the need for a permanent underclass to manage the machines. Instead, it lessened the method of physical labor required and increased the productivity for greater profits more evenly distributed among the north and south.

Thus, the master-slave relationship became the boss-to-worker relationship model still practiced today as the basis of the economy with many of the same philosophical principles regarding labor.

The master to slave mentality and dichotomy persists today for whites to become indignant at the very suggestion that discrimination exists or the audacity to expect relief. There is a diametrically opposed residual effect of this mentality that has dissipated over time but still exists.

A polar opposite of a shared personality disorder, racist whites psychopathic character traits devoid of compassion or remorse and black’s submissive need for permission and conciliation. The refusal of whites and the request of black regarding reparation displays both mentalities. If they are delusional, then we are imaginary, or is that the other way around? It is hard to tell.

Centuries of bigoted behavior still leaves us in the position of requesting what an overwhelming number of whites refuse to give or recognize. However, the context of slavery and the psychological realities created a subculture of survival for blacks which in essence has manifested into our saving grace and sustaining resiliency. The missing piece has been cohesion securing an identifiable targeted objective with a solitary concentration.

Targeted penetration into isolated and sustainable components using relentless incremental campaigns of focus building scope and momentum. So, if reparations are forthcoming, then beautiful, but until then, we must forge ahead from a position of fortitude, focus, and resolve to realize that a shift in the paradigm of our perspective is the most efficient and assured way of securing equality.

Previously suffering from an extreme deficiency, we now have sufficient agency to pay ourselves first. Meaning no permission is needed from others for assurances of equality, but that as always, we must renew our efforts from where we are now with what we have to build alliances and coalitions for prosperity and equality starting with us.

We have enough, we have plenty, but the division of our resources and purpose cannot be counterproductive or diverted. Discipline is needed. Certainly not separatism, we have paid too much but inclusion on our terms to equally wet our beak.

Repeated requests always transform into pleading, which is always distasteful under any circumstances and rarely effective since it grants the power to refuse or grant the request. Far from being downtrodden or self-pitying, we should be encouraged at how far we have come, what we have had to overcome, and what final frontiers of racism we are near to conquering.

You never had the right to dominion over us, so now we do not need to seek your permission for our salvation. Reparations are for your salvation. Again, the most valuable gesture would be to knock it off, but either way, we have made tremendous gains to close the gap, notwithstanding the tremendous gap that remains.

Rest assured your children will not face the retribution of your actions but will have to adjust to the extinction of your privilege. Your survival as a race will not be endangered as you claim to fear, but your most significant fear of the elimination of your advantage will be realized. The privilege or displeasure of white America will no longer be the paramount concern on which society operates.

Your substantial resistance should be more productively directed toward rectifying the problem, not denial and concealment to continue your comfort. The hypocrisy of denouncing bullying, being too strong for bullying does not extend beyond being too weak for racism, perhaps the greatest form of bullying. Your racist fragile psyche and mind are dependent on the intimidation of racism. The poisoning of a feeble mind believing that white skin somehow makes you divine.

Deprived of privilege, your means of survival will not be like the constant struggle for survival from the lowest socio-economic status of society like ours has been. It will not be sabotaged by the systemic injustices you have consistently heaped upon us.

The crux of many issues in the black community has been influenced by slavery and Jim Crow, which will not be anything you will have to contend with as contributing influences of dysfunction in your communities only as a haunting nightmare of your actions.

Black is not only a race but has been a condition, a condition that has had an extreme toll. Levies for atrocities and crimes against black humanity were committed over centuries. An overdue tariff is owed in this realm but may be collected in another with your soul.

Deflection or denial of these conditions cannot be independent of issues confronting the black community since close examination will likely reveal a correlation to slavery, discrimination, or the psychological trauma caused by them.

Not to mention the generational poverty caused and endorsed. Therefore, the repeated insistence on deflecting onto other problems in the black community does not absolve you of your infractions or justify our exclusion from equal treatment under the law or equivalent opportunities.

A three-dimensional understanding of a four-dimensional problem leaves you one dimension short of a resolution. The Confederate heritage and the American legacy are synonymous with each other from the inception of this country and the founding father’s vision.

If the founding fathers were as wise and incredible as they are portrayed, then why was slavery allowed to be woven into the fabric of America’s DNA? It was intentional, and maybe why some whites think they need to take the country back for white exclusivity following its purpose.

The founding father’s guidance and influence is still the overriding authority today of adherence suggesting their vision has transcended nearly four-hundred and fifty years of governance but not the detrimental effects of slavery.

The constant square peg in a round hole predicament of stretching the interpretation of their intent on matters they could not have envisioned essentially expresses the intent of the current interpreter.

The emphasis is then on the current interpreter to subjectively convey their own understanding and guessing the original intent or interpretation. Clarity of interpretation then is the paramount objective or selective choice of a subjective interpreter but still conjecture.

The confusion and misconceptions of understandings and allowances of iniquities have traversed, deviated, and wandered over time with the subjective translations of intent and purpose. Still, the one constant has been economic exploitation by the manner of racism.

In their infinite wisdom, the founding fathers should have calculated the compounded effects and centrifugal implications of racism. So, therefore, they never envisioned one day having to address the restitutions accrued and the adjudication required to resolve reparations. Accordingly, it was recognized that restitution was owed but reneged upon with the forty acres and a mule promise.

They should have had the foresight to envision that it would become one of the perils of the country surviving just as the American Revolution had. Refusing remedies to offenses unjustly enforced creating a domestic threat from dissatisfaction.

Attempting to maintain their advantage suppressing anyone or anything that supported a change, even the government. The last time it was called the Civil War, and this time it is called Trumpism, MAGA, Patriotism, and Republican complicity.

If my words, tone, and honesty are harsh, then the reality has been more harsh and bitter to experience for us over a prolonged period of centuries. Feeble attempts to misrepresent, reduce, or quantify our damages expose the unwillingness to understand, preventing a resolution.

You must first understand then accept the problem thru the spectrum of the casualties caused before you can rectify them. Racist ideology and white’s resistance to being held accountable leaves me unconvinced that significant change or national reparations are on the horizon, but collapse is impending.

The combination of racism and economics fueling the downfall as symptoms of the illness. The disease is self-righteous arrogance not capable of change exposing a self-destructive premise.

If repeated reminders of discrimination and disregard for resolution are any indication that racist compulsion leaves bigots powerless to resist and hopelessly cursed destined to be like the scorpion’s sting, being in their nature to sting even if it destroys them as well.

There can be no genuine remorse without redress and consequences to express and satisfy the wounded, but the truth is that there can be no healing without remedy. While some are hoping and wishing, I am well beyond the age of believing Santa Claus is real or if real reparations or healing will be achieved any time soon.

P.S. Be sure to wear your seat belt. We are expecting some stubborn turbulence ahead.

Thurston K. Atlas

Creating A Buzz

 

 

The Black Trilogy-Crimes Against Humanity Part 3



REPARATIONS and RESOLUTIONS.

The solution is plain and simple in concept, although admittingly complex and comprehensive in its application and solemn and unwavering in commitment. The commitment requires meaningful change, including grievances and infringements where substantial damages and exploitation have been identified.

These can be self-identifying and voluntary admissions or exposed and involuntarily sanctions. The remedies should reflect the capacity and benefits of their participation.

War crime tribunals pursue individuals many decades past their crimes having been identified. Once their transgressions are exposed, their identity becomes known, their location secured, and their participation verifies their pursuit is relentless.

No matter how small or how much time has passed, whether they are remorseful or not, they are subject to the penalty of law for their actions. Countries, businesses, and institutions have the same moral and ethical societal obligations to refrain from crimes against humanity or become subject to redress and accountability. 

Under God’s law and moral righteousness, if not by man’s written law, this should be rectified since we have always known the what, the who, the excuses, the locality, and the refusal to be held accountable.

Man’s law and history’s alterations have always sought to indemnify these iniquities, manipulate reality, and contort societal structures protecting the guilty or claiming their immunity. Unadulterated chronicles of history have constantly spewed forth the guilty whose deeds were so openly practiced that a resolution would seem uncontested. Unbiased enforcement of the law does not require the guilty to consent or be remorseful, only to have committed the act.

The resolution should include the national and international companies and entities exclusively funding initiatives for Blacks and their communities because others have been funded at the exclusion of Blacks, so they have already essentially received theirs.

These profiteers of slavery should be compelled to mea culpa and commit to corrective measures. Their vile narrative as citizens of the world amended to reflect that the sins and fruits of those sins be acknowledged by redeeming actions to offset the destructive effects of their exploitation of Black people.

Let history then be the future measure to judge the actions and manner that these atrocities were corrected and a commitment to redress demonstrated. Avoidance of racist elements and the resulting harmful repercussions have been ignored, allowing the accumulation of and exacerbating a resolution.

Since access to wealth and equal opportunity were denied, fairness demands that it is now what must be provided. Let us not be naïve about what will or should be done, but the sincere objective understood in its undertaking. The details and implementation of the means to accomplish this are complex, but the need for a determined commitment is clear.  

Imagine if the United States of America is a house. The citizens are the house’s occupants. The leadership is the parents in a cooperative and committed relationship dedicated to keeping the family dynamic strong while working to overcome difficult times. Staying together for the occupant’s benefit realizing the value of the individual parts and any selfish interest will fracture the good of the whole house.

A house divided cannot stand as conditions worsen and the foundation begins to crack. One party cannot seek to minimize the problem because it is most slanted toward their benefit and convenience without consideration for the consequences, sufferings, or contributions that have contributed significantly to the success of the household.

If the other party being marginalized daring to cry out that they have a problem, then WE should have a problem, and a conciliatory resolution needs to prevail.

In America’s house, regarding the context of recriminations for racial discrimination, the establishment of a Declaration of Resolution must be incorporated into the societal structures to begin to rectify slavery and Jim Crow.

Only then can renovations begin to repair America’s inescapable history as proud purveyors of crimes against Black humanity on a national and global scale. The guilty parties were interchangeable, the occurrences countless, and the despicable actions beneficially incorporated; so, must it be with the impact of the resolution.

Any Declaration of Resolution must comprehensively consider the following points: principle-based and not relegated to a person, occurrence, or movement but an unwavering commitment. It must be implemented in a context devoid of grandiose individual acclaim but sculptured in collective indebtedness, not to be accusatory but factual, where everything must be on the table for examination.

Finally, anoint and elevate the necessity above all else, creating a force and not a target. The insanity of using failed divisible methods must yield to an effective consolidated sustainability resistant to sabotage and subjugation tactics.

To skim the surface of grievances that historically touches all levels of government and society, I have taken the liberty to offer these considerations with what has been my humble observation. It can be amended or supplemented to whatever the agreed-upon or negotiated redress is in the form of authentic actualized measures that resonate as vociferously as the indignations, exploitations, and atrocities have.

Government and legislative processes

Government and legislative processes compelling meaningful policy changes and enforcement. Focused statutory enactments and legislative imperatives to ensure proper implementation, established legal precedence and procedures inclusive of authentic fairness, actual unbiased application of representation, and accessibility in equal diligence to reflect Black inclusion, protection, prosperity, and participation across the governmental spectrum.

Educational content and teaching

Educational content and teaching need to be corrected regarding historical inaccuracies and perspectives to remove the racial superiority indoctrinations. Any exaggerated accomplishments, eugenics referenced and brainwashing propaganda, or religious misrepresentations thoroughly rebuked. The sinister intent of material concealments distorting the Confederate heritage, racist validations, and delusional impressions of condescension exposed.

Black history and African heritage should be portrayed in their truth, accuracy, and glory. Education should reflect the unadulterated truth comprehensively conveyed without propaganda purposes. It has to inform and depict an accurate illustration of knowledge and history. Access to this knowledge should be available and disseminated at any location inaccuracies have been dispensed.

Dispelling deceptions where an inquisitive mind exists to pursue it without undue influence but with an open mind to accept, reject, correct, or improve it through individual exploration. My personal approach to knowledge is to know it without the need to accept it or believe in it but only to know and understand it.

But debatably, one of the biggest detriments to blacks has been our lack of inclusion in various financial, economic, investment, insurance, annuities, and retirement fund management structures. Access to capital, general monetary instruments, and wealth-building opportunities and principles used for our advantage previously used to our disadvantage.

This lack of knowledge, emphasis, and exposure has historically prevented our compounded accumulation of wealth by a determined bias of fiscal design. When finally allowed to read, they could not let us count accumulating wealth. 

Law enforcement and criminal court

Law enforcement and the criminal court are beyond repair as it is currently constituted, but that is not to say it is not needed. What is required is an operational modernization, an ideological upgrade, with many procedural techniques, policies, and tactics revamped to not so readily lead to force that is deadly or otherwise.

A display of empathy for the situations and circumstances that those they encounter come from or are relegated to as a predisposition of their employment. The police should also understand and familiarize themselves with the people they police through prior community exposure and interaction as part of academy training.

Transparency and accountability need to be based on admitting improprieties, abuses, and damages when they occur and are apparent. The justifications and constraints used for actions, intent, fairness, and respect for the public should be the parameters that law enforcement must abide by.

Not blanket qualified immunity for misconduct or violations. Any consumer warranty or protection is voided after a disqualifying action or breach, so should it also be with qualified immunity. This standard should not be circumvented, subjective, arbitrary, or ambiguous.

Adjustments and changes to the expectations of policing and the reasonable execution of the law are required. Police immunity from their actions has come and gone. Appropriate conduct is demanded, and transparent recognition of misconduct is presumed where accountability is the paramount responsibility of police duties concerning the public. It must also be with themselves to maintain respectability and integrity of enforcement.

Blacks caught up in the criminal justice system are there for many reasons, definitely for some of our ill-advised decisions for one reason. But, these causes can often be based on limited choices and options that are frequently the result of economic desperation reflecting discrimination and lack of viable options.

This is sometimes a reflection of bias and the financial status and hopelessness created by purposeful default. Thus, making it seldom by choice but more by condition. Nevertheless, it is the best choice out of several bad choices that seem like a good idea at the time.   

When the only seemingly readily accessible choice is a bad choice when chosen by us but a similar bad choice or absent an option unavailable to us when selected by someone else, the judgment cannot be different. Not to justify poor decisions but to simply better understand their possible origins in thought and deed.

Who is arrested and for what crimes depends disproportionately on how and where law enforcement resources are directed. Lack of opportunity and despair often dictates the propensity for committing crimes. At the basis of many crimes, regardless of race, are economic ramifications and the lack of opportunities to avoid them.

It is part of cultural conditioning and reinforcement considering the accessibility of alternatives. Still, just as we expect others to be liable for their decisions, we must be responsible for ours. Therefore, the impartiality of the equal application of the law must also be applied.

Sentencing for crimes and assured due process of law should be statistically no harsher or restrictive where the race can be a discernable factor. The demographic percentages of arrest and incarceration for blacks sounds very few alarms but yields plenty of devious justifications and dubious convictions. The bail bond system aids in the process as a caste system more reflective of economic status than crime.

The bail bond system is a subtle system of prolonged incarceration and guilty plea-provoking motivations devoid of consideration of actual guilt. However, it often produces plea bargain inspirations for a guilty verdict. Lack of bail has been known to soften the resolve regardless of guilt.

Cash bail needs to be abolished as the antiquated racist system it has been and as currently constituted its application, because it is a straight-up inclination to penalize someone based on economics instead of the crime committed.

Bond money after the fact has no impact on the commission of your crime, your guilt, your return to court, propensity to commit another crime, or your willingness to intimidate a witness. How much money you have does not determine these things, but other considerations should including victim impact, criminal past, and ability to deter further illegal actions.

The law has proven to be only as good as someone’s willingness to respect and abide by it, not money for bond. The bond is intended as a surety note meaning a financial instrument of assurance, not guilt or a return to court because it does not assure either of the other two.

Property ownership and housing

Property ownership and housing conditions, geographic housing choices, and neighborhood investment and development often leave Black people in a stagnant spiral of declining or horizontal growth, which reiterates generational poverty and despair. Thus, never venturing outside the familiar confines physically or economically of the circumstance we have come to know.

 Sure, there will be those who escape this purposeful fate, but a vast number cannot stray too far away from its grip. Property ownership and property valuations have long been a primary method of wealth accumulation and the effective denial of such by discrimination.

Housing is also manipulated for redlining, gentrification, and gerrymandering affecting government services, bias-influenced redevelopment, and suppressive political or electoral representation. Property tax, abatements, and other government allotments impact everything from the standard of education and schools to the services received.

Lack of enforcement of housing codes, higher insurance rates, usuary interest rates, and many other fees and hidden barriers further absorb resources to impair black wealth. The social, financial, and political withholdings further the imbalance of resources that can be used for our own prosperity instead of those secretly siphoning from us.  

Banking and lending practices

Banking and lending practices further discrimination encouraging loan and credit denial. Predatory lending practices and the lack of fundamental capital investment creates property ownership barriers.

Obstacles to entrepreneurship, transference of wealth impediments, lack of wealth-generating opportunities, and restrictive scalability in equity positions limit avenues to participation that have not been customarily extended to the Black experience or available fiscal options.

Given the number of banks, insurance companies, and other organizations, including Wall Street, who profited from human trafficking in the slave trade, there should be no shortage of remunerations and expertise to alleviate and change these prevailing harmful financial elements of the Black experience.

Being very familiar with balance sheets, accrued liabilities, accounts payable, venture capital contingencies, maturity dates, and the like, there should be no hesitancy to the existence of the obligation even if reluctant to the terms.  

 

 

Food

The nutritional value of food is the foundation of good health, especially in young children and older adults. Therefore, the affordability and availability of that food are the two primary factors in choosing what to eat or feed our family. Of course, convenience is also a significant consideration, but convenience can be overcome by discipline and the availability of better options.

Cultural preferences shaped by generations of lack of available, affordable choices led to a lack of options, concern, or awareness of what we are essentially consuming and the effect on our digestive system and organs, igniting a ticking time bomb. The quality, freshness, and mislabeling, along with the chemicals and ingredients, furthers any damages the wrong foods create.

The healthcare implications, illnesses, and associated diseases which heavily stricken the black community can substantially be attributed to our dietary choices. Our nutritional choices are directly associated with our economic condition and proximity to better choices.

Fast foods, low-quality foods, and sugary drinks are our main dietary health risks, and usually, the cheaper the food, the unhealthier it is to consume. Food deserts and lack of fresh vegetables and grains are nutritional considerations that affect our health as much as income inequality.

It is the combination and culmination of several things. Food co-ops and farmer markets are things blacks must undertake and support, denouncing the unhealthy choices synonymous with illness. Once supplied, it is incumbent upon us to make a concerted cultural shift to embrace a healthier diet.

Nutritional education correlates to health and wellness. Consider this, would you let your child sit and eat 12 teaspoons of sugar, not to mention the calories equivalent to a bottle of Pepsi? What about a 12-ounce Coke that has 10 teaspoons? Sugar is one of the prime addictive and destructive offenders hidden in drinks.

It is not only the food choices but the drink choices as well. Nutritional education is a must to offset the healthcare and pharmaceutical industries’ dependence on black suffering, much like the criminal justice system’s reliance on the black arrest.

Black farmers are not prioritized on the same level as other farmers on the food chain supply side, and capital for equipment and innovation is harder to secure or more challenging to get approved for. This is a method to coerce them into unfavorable financial conditions and land forfeitures.

The discrimination against the black farmer makes farming expenses unsustainable for them and their products less profitable while subsidizing the white farmer’s success. Elimination of food deserts and affordable quality food must be made available to the Black community.

Healthcare and medical conditions

Healthcare and medical conditions usually correlate with the quality of care, the timeliness of care, the coverage of care, the cost of care, and the continuation of care. These have all proven to be problematic for blacks, in particular impacting our quality of life.

The only way to secure these objectives for those unemployed or underemployed is to take a vow of poverty and remain under the threshold to qualify for assistance. To maintain healthcare, you then must remain unproductive.

Discrimination in the medical field has created disparities in routine preventive services, seniors’ medications, and senior care. Proper nutrition, mortality rates, childbirth, and prenatal care reveals a racially disproportionate exposure.

Mental health and substance abuse addictions are struggles criminalized, adding to our concealment and cautious skepticism of treatment. These are some of the primary afflictions gone underserved for generations. Furthermore, lack of affordability, medical access, and apathy to medical symptoms combines to account for escalating medical conditions that plague our community to date.

Lack of engagement from the medical community resulting in callousness and neglect has been insidiously infused, contributing to the Black communities’ mistrust. These patterns and practices have created mistrust, discouragement, misinformation, disregard, and lack of engagement. Comparatively, quality options, proximity to medical facilities, and integrity of medical personnel would foster less cynicism regarding discrimination.

Reparations and methods of payment

Reparations and methods of payment by the profiteers should include but not be limited to money, products, services, internships, trust funds, endowments, foundations, equity, credit, ownership, grants, management, and employment opportunity. Hence these remedies should be clearly defined and verifiable. Not readily susceptible to misappropriation, corruption, manipulation, overvaluation, or discontinuation.

It should be prioritized for at least three generations of duration with sustained and confirmed diligence. It should also be enforced by law and penalty if breached. Whatever the business or specialty of the purveyor should be the very least consideration that they can offer since we are sure that they at least possess that service, so cash is not the only option.

The government is not totally responsible for reparations since this as a nation of people and businesses that fully or partially participated in or benefited directly or indirectly in the atrocities by commission, complicity, or silence. They should also pitch in for the solution since they were party to the problem and benefits. The cry for reparations would have ended many years ago before the issue became so convoluted if racism had discontinued.

 Damn denouncing an act that has continued despite hundreds of years of broken promises and systematic abuses and discriminations. So, the biggest most valuable reparation is the discontinuation of the oppression of black prosperity since by now, it should be apparent that the days of breaking our spirit are forever over. Despite the tyranny and murder rained down on us, we have proven to be resilient.

Slavery, superiority, and discrimination originally were a matter of economics. Please make no mistake about it. Now, it is a matter of mental illness driven by delusional groupthink by everyone knowing it was nonsense, including you. However, still needed are others to believe it to preserve your privilege.

The terror of your white privilege no longer comforting you has led to this irrational masquerade claiming an unfairness to you and pseudo bravado afraid of a world without a rigged advantage to bolster your fallacy. It was justified by manipulated and deceitful nonsense, and you have enriched yourself enormously with the many benefits of this fallacy.

Many arguments are made against reparations, but the one that can not be made is that you did not commit the atrocities. That you didn’t do it. That it was not done. So next time an unarmed black man is murdered by law enforcement, or they decide to rest for 8:46 seconds on his neck murdering him, condemn the shit, and consider that as a down payment on reparations that only cost you your voice and having a soul. 

Acknowledgment

The lack of acknowledgment for the contributions of our service across this country causes patriotism to be used to imply whites were the only ones who defended or contributed to America’s preeminence.

Our contributions to invention, law, business, education, sports, science, entertainment, social and humanitarian efforts, literature, heritage, and politics need to be appropriately accredited to us without the whitewash of thievery or misappropriation.

Recovery, forgiveness, and grace all begin with admission and confession. There can be no prospects of redemption with persistent denial, excuses, and minimalizations.

Warring countries have been rebuilt, populations compensated, and even the treasonous rebellious Confederacy south rebuilt and welcomed back into the union. Yet, on the other hand, the leadership of the Republican party coddled an insurrection with overt racial overtones on the Capitol, threatening democracy.

None of these transgressions have been a part of the Black experience or nor have black people received this substantial generosity of consideration.

European immigrants were recruited and given land, resources, and encouragement to own slaves to assimilate with white America to help to maintain a disproportionate ratio of whites to blacks. Thus, white skin tone rather than origination took precedence over dark skin. 

Today to assimilate having white skin, you can call yourself Ted instead of Raphael or abandon your German heritage and grandfather’s name of drumpf, claiming the confederate heritage as your own despite your immigrant roots. Immigrants of a white skin tone from anywhere or of white European descent can stand at a distance and be considered white and sometimes even closer if they do not speak.

But no matter how distant within eyesight, a Black person can stand and not be considered anything other than Black on sight. You see, the dark skin tone is the sole determinant. All of this is still true today for European descendants who can brag about how they came to this country and got assimilated to being white and benefited from masquerading as such. 

Immigration of any darker complexion people is considered undesirable, while white immigrants are favorable to maintain and restock the white majority. Fortunately, that majority is waning along with their privileged white utopia.

Therefore, whites’ advantage and privilege enjoyed for so long now require that they pass the sugar. The taste of honey has long been hoarded and requires an equitable allocation of concessions and redress to be conceded. 

The implementation of equality and the resulting rise in the Black quality of life will vicariously benefit all races and all elements of society, including the Black one this time.

These gestures have been made before for immigrants, other countries, and other races. So, it is not unreasonable that the Black race that has suffered the most should now enjoy the same consideration and expectation. No longer subjected to malicious intent simply because of a darker hue of complexion.

Those who would cry far left-wing ideology, socialism, and socio-economic welfare, I would submit reparations is the most far right-winged proposal imagined. Demonstrated by your willingness to bail out the one percent, Wall Street, big banks, and big business for the overall good of the country and health of the economy as being too big to fail. 

Never know when you will need us again, and America you will. So it would seem wise and prudent that Blacks and equality are also TOO BIG TO FAIL too! The same actions are needed even if it is referenced by a different label or perspective, not called reparations. So you see, we are united in our prerequisite for this action if not in our method how. Consider it services rendered or a down payment deposit.

God bless America and the wisdom for America to change for its own salvation, preservation, and prosperity equally. Let us pray in honor of the Christian cloak of deceit that you have hidden under for so long, the nation’s tolerance for inequality, and the conditioning of the black race to beg for deliverance where it is expected to forgive you for you surely deny what you have done.

So, let us pray.

Forgive them, father, for they have sinned, but they have not repented or atoned for their sins. Instead, they have practiced and concealed these abominations cloaked in your name to not only discredit you but to discredit themselves.

Justifying their brutality and moral deprivation in your holy name by committing the most atrocious of sins against a segment of your people. Centuries corrupting all that should be held sacred according to your word.

They do not seek your judgment, for surely you are not pleased, and condemnation can only follow. Salvation has been leveraged for gold, silver, sugar, and cotton with no regard for humanity.

Even less respect for your holiness or the one you sent who surely cannot pay for these sins. Without repentance, they have been rebuked. So practiced by Britain and America in every corner of the globe since before the United States’ inception.

They have worshipped this idolatrous slavery obsession and the false prophets above you and the very humanity that they still refuse to recognize also as your creation.

They have borne false witness and even murdered in your name. The above-stated crimes against humanity for earthly riches have blinded them to your glory and caused them to pervert your word masquerading as a true believer forsaking your honor without remorse of their deeds.

They have neither been meek, merciful, pure of heart, or peacemakers. They have forsaken justice, are devoid of integrity, have offered exploitation to the downtrodden, and have broken every covenant of yours in spirit and action.

They cannot offer their tarnished soul for redemption but for eternal condemnation for freely choosing and committing these atrocities. By your word, you condemn them and with their actions and words, they condemn themselves!

The soil is drenched with blood, horror, and abomination from these purgatory fixations, steadfast commissions, and continued denial. We can only pray they repent acknowledging their transgressions and denouncing the evil they imposed through the oppression of our Black ancestry.

For their horrendous crimes against humanity and religion, I fear saying three Hail Mary’s and two Our Fathers is not sufficient for these trespasses. Confession, repentance, and reparations for damages would be a sign to humanity and God of their sincerity for salvation by not only word but by deed.

And, of course, to no longer practice or tolerate these repulsive transgressions ever again towards anyone as they have no justification. It might just be the difference between salvation, survival, or being judged harshly stricken by your wrath.

It might be said to practice what God’s word teaches, not the hypocrisy of scribes nor Pharisees worshipping the coin, politics, or a defeated President! Time to submit to a reckoning and atonement, for Christ’s sake and America’s, we can only pray.

P.S. This is not an indictment of religion, just how it has been and continues to be used to accomplish and justify evil intentions by self-proclaimed conservative, patriotic evangelical God-fearing racists.

This in no suggests a blanket accusation against all white past or present in America regarding slave trade involvement or racism. However, it does illustrate the factual account of who, when, and what it applies. I think we can all agree if the shoe fits, it can only be your shoe Cinderella.

Thurston K. Atlas

Creating A Buzz