Slain Dallas Cop Might’ve Been A White Supremacist: Still A Hero?

Well, if you ask me, screaming "Black Power" and finding white people to beat up is a really simple way to be a racist asshole. They aren't even pretending not to be racist at that point. Blowing up a gas station, in any other situation, would be an act of terrorism. I don't know why the liberals think this is any exception.

He doesn't.

The FBI Has a New Plan to Spy on High School Students Across the Country

Under new guidelines, Muslim students will be disproportionately targeted – but all young people will be suspect.

By Sarah Lazare / AlterNet
March 2, 2016


Under new guidelines, the FBI is instructing high schools across the country to report students who criticize government policies and “western corruption” as potential future terrorists, warning that “anarchist extremists” are in the same category as ISIS and young people who are poor, immigrants or travel to “suspicious” countries are more likely to commit horrific violence.

Based on the widely unpopular British “anti-terror” mass surveillance program, the FBI’s "Preventing Violent Extremism in Schools" guidelines, released in January, are almost certainly designed to single out and target Muslim-American communities. However, in its caution to avoid the appearance of discrimination, the agency identifies risk factors that are so broad and vague that virtually any young person could be deemed dangerous and worthy of surveillance, especially if she is socio-economically marginalized or politically outspoken.

This overwhelming threat is then used to justify a massive surveillance apparatus, wherein educators and pupils function as extensions of the FBI by watching and informing on each other.

The FBI’s justification for such surveillance is based on McCarthy-era theories of radicalization, in which authorities monitor thoughts and behaviors that they claim to lead to acts of violent subversion, even if those people being watched have not committed any wrongdoing. This model has been widely discredited as a violence prevention method, including by the U.S. government, but it is now being imported to schools nationwide as official federal policy.

Schools as hotbeds of extremism

The new guidelines depict high schools as hotbeds of extremism, where dangers lurk in every corner. “High school students are ideal targets for recruitment by violent extremists seeking support for their radical ideologies, foreign fighter networks, or conducting acts of violence within our borders,” the document warns, claiming that youth “possess inherent risk factors.” In light of this alleged threat, the FBI instructs teachers to “incorporate a two-hour block of violent extremism awareness training” into the core curriculum for all youth in grades 9 through 12.

According to the FBI’s educational materials for teenagers, circulated as a visual aide to their new guidelines, the following offenses constitute signs that “could mean that someone plans to commit violence” and therefore should be reported: “Talking about traveling to places that sound suspicious”; “Using code words or unusual language”; “Using several different cell phones and private messaging apps”; and “Studying or taking pictures of potential targets (like a government building).”

Under the category of domestic terrorists, the educational materials warn of the threat posed by “anarchist extremists.” The FBI states, “Anarchist extremists believe that society should have no government, laws, or police, and they are loosely organized, with no central leadership… Violent anarchist extremists usually target symbols of capitalism they believe to be the cause of all problems in society—such as large corporations, government organizations, and police agencies.”

Similarly, “Animal Rights Extremists and Environmental Extremists” are placed alongside “white supremacy extremists”, ISIS and Al Qaeda as terrorists out to recruit high school students. The materials also instruct students to watch out for extremist propaganda messages that communicate criticisms of "corrupt western nations" and express "government mistrust.”

If you "see suspicious behavior that might lead to violent extremism," the resource states, consider reporting it to "someone you trust," including local law enforcement officials like police officers and FBI agents.

This terrorist threat does not stay within the geographic bounds of high schools, but extends to the Internet, which the FBI guidelines describe as a “playground” for extremism. The agency warns that online gaming “is sometimes used to communicate, train, or plan terrorist activities.” Encryption, ominously referred to as “going dark,” is often used to facilitate “extremism discussions,” the agency states. In reality, encryption is a commonly used form of protection against government spying and identity theft and is often employed to safeguard financial transactions.

Young Muslims are the real targets

At the surface level, the FBI’s new guidelines do not appear to single out Muslim students. The document and supplementary educational materials warn of a broad array of threats, including anti-abortion and white supremacist extremists. The Jewish Defense League is listed alongside Hizbollah and Al Qaeda as an imminent danger to young people in the United States.

But a closer read reveals that the FBI consistently invokes an Islamic threat without naming it. Cultural and religious differences, as well as criticisms of western imperialism, are repeatedly mentioned as risk factors for future extremism. “Some immigrant families may not be sufficiently present in a youth’s life due to work constraints to foster critical thinking,” the guidelines state.

“The document aims to encourage schools to monitor their students more carefully for signs of radicalization but its definition of radicalization is vague,” said Arun Kundnani, author of The Muslims are Coming! Islamophobia, extremism, and the domestic War on Terror and an adjunct professor at New York University. “Drawing on the junk science of radicalization models, the document dangerously blurs the distinction between legitimate ideological expression and violent criminal actions.”

“In practice, schools seeking to implement this document will end up monitoring Muslim students disproportionately,” Kundnani told AlterNet. “Muslims who access religious or political material will be seen as suspicious, even though there is no reason to think such material indicates a likelihood of terrorism.”

The Obama administration’s Countering Violent Extremism (CVE) program is heavily influenced by its British counterpart, which exclusively focuses on spying on Muslim communities and has been deeply controversial from the onset.

Launched in the wake of the 2005 London bombings, the British the “Preventing Violent Extremism” (Prevent) program monitors and surveils Muslim communities and people, including mosque-goers and members of community organizations who have committed no wrongdoing. The iniative has been broadly criticized as oppressive and stigmatizing of British Muslims, including by a committee of British lawmakers in 2010.

Yet Prevent has expanded since implementation, and as of summer 2015, British public schools are now mandated to report students for supposed early warning signs of extremism. According to the advocacy organization CAGE, this program has led to the wide-scale interrogation of children without parental consent. Just last month, a Luton high school student was questioned by police for wearing a “Free Palestine” badge.

The first public iteration of the U.S. counterpart to this program emerged five years ago to “address ideologically inspired violence in the Homeland,” uniting a broad array of government agencies, including the FBI and Department of Homeland Security. In 2015, Attorney General Eric Holder announced a CVE summit at the White House and unrolled three “pilot programs” in Boston, Minneapolis and Los Angeles. According to the Council on American-Islamic Relations, these initiatives solely target Muslims in each of these cities.

Muslim communities and human rights campaigners have raised profound concerns about civil rights violations. “Past injustices have taught us to be wary when the government redefines its moral and legal authority in response to overbroad national security concerns,” reads a statement from nearly 50 Muslim organizations in the Minneapolis area. “It is our recommendation that the government stop investing in programs that will only stigmatize, divide and marginalize our communities further.”

But instead, the government is expanding CVE programming into high schools across the country.

Using discredited science to identify danger everywhere

“The whole concept of CVE is based on the conveyor belt theory – the idea that ‘extreme ideas’ lead to violence,” Michael German, a fellow with the Brennan Center for Justice’s Liberty and National Security Program, told AlterNet. “These programs fall back on the older ‘stages of radicalization’ models, where the identified indicators are the expression of political grievances and religious practices.”

The lineage of this model can be traced to the first red scare in America, as well as J. Edgar Hoover’s crackdown on civil rights and anti-war activists. In the post-9/11 era, the conveyor-belt theory has led to the mass surveillance of Muslims communities by law enforcement outfits ranging from the FBI to the New York Police Department.

U.S. government agencies continue to embrace this model despite the fact that it has been thoroughly debunked by years of scholarly research, Britain’s M15 spy agency and an academic study directly supported by the Department of Homeland Security.

Even the FBI’s new guidelines claim that the agency “does not advocate the application of any psychological or demographic ‘profiles’ or check lists of indicators to identify students on a pathway to radicalization.”

Yet in the same breath, the FBI freely lists “concerning behaviors” that indicate an individual is “progressing on a trajectory to radicalization and/or future violent action in furtherance of an extremist cause.” In other words, the FBI is using new terminology to call for students to be profiled as potential future terrorists.

As Hugh Handeyside, staff attorney for the ACLU’s national security project, told AlterNet, “Broadening the definition of violent extremism to include a range of belief-driven violence underscores that the FBI is diving head-first into community spying. Framing this conduct as ‘concerning behavior’ doesn’t conceal the fact that the FBI is policing students’ thoughts and trying to predict the future based on those thoughts.”

If the FBI’s criteria are to be believed, children who exhibit “development delay or disorders, resulting from low quality supportive environments” are at greater risk. So too are the “disenfranchised – student feeling lost, lonely, hopeless, or abandoned.” The FBI calls for greater scrutiny of students with mental health disorders and identifies neighborhoods families, and socio-economic status as factors to watch out for.

There are already reasons to be concerned about who will be most vulnerable under this mass surveillance plan. In what is popularly known as the “school-to-prison pipeline”, students of color and young people with disabilities are already disproportionately suspended, expelled, arrested and funneled into juvenile prisons for alleged behavioral infractions at school.

The FBI’s instructions to surveil and report young people not for wrong they have committed, but for violence they supposedly might enact in the future, is likely to promote an intensification of this draconian practice. Using a program initiated to spy on Muslim-American communities, the government is calling for sanctuaries of learning to be transformed into panopticons, in which students and educators are the informers and all young people are suspect.

Sarah Lazare is a staff writer for AlterNet. A former staff writer for Common Dreams, she coedited the book About Face: Military Resisters Turn Against War. Follow her on Twitter at @sarahlazare.

Police Unions Demand Extra Pay For Accountability And Transparency

http://www.huffingto...a6383?section=

Police chiefs, officers and citizens across the country have gone on record in support of policy changes in response to controversial instances of police exercising extreme, often deadly force.

But police unions, which serve as mouthpieces for many rank-and-file officers, are responding by holding up the push for reform. Over the past few months, unions in a number of cities have stated that the only way they’ll accept change is if they get something in return.

In some cases, unions have taken a particularly hard-nosed approach to bargaining, seeking financial concessions from taxpayers in exchange for measures designed to ensure that officers are doing their jobs effectively and appropriately.

Earlier this month in Cincinnati, a local Fraternal Order of Police attorney sent a “cease and desist” letter to the city, saying that officers should only use body cameras if the city was willing to pay them more.

Daniel Hils, president of one of Cincinnati’s Fraternal Order of Police lodges, acknowledged that body cameras are coming whether he likes it or not. But to him, the devices mean additional expectations and responsibilities for officers, and should therefore translate to more compensation.

“We recognize [body cameras are] the direction we’re going,” Hils told The Huffington Post. “But I believe this is a game changer, as far as complexity of the job. And this level of monitoring will result in positives and negatives about what it’s like to be a policeman. Because of that, I think it does require some additional compensation or at least bargaining for that.”

Taxpayers in the city were already expected to foot the $6 million bill for the 700 body cameras scheduled to be on the street by the end of the year. And Cincinnati already understands the value of these devices. Last year, footage from a body camera worn by a University of Cincinnati police officer provided key details surrounding the controversial fatal shooting of an unarmed black man during a traffic stop. A grand jury later indicted the officer on charges of murder and manslaughter.


Still, some experts on public sector unions see merit in Hils’ argument. And it isn’t unusual for unions to take advantage of a potential shift in their day-to-day functions, said Nelson Lichtenstein, director of the Center for the Study of Work, Labor and Democracy at the University of California Santa Barbara.

“You enhance the duties or add additional responsibilities to a job and then you want to be compensated for it,” he told The Huffington Post. “That’s what collective bargaining is all about.”

But some advocates for reform say demanding more money for officers to wear body cameras is insulting. Unions are now effectively holding transparency and accountability hostage, and treating basic oversight like a luxury item that isn’t included in the usual terms of service.

This sort of resistance conflicts with some of the broader messaging from law enforcement. Many police officers have said they support body cameras. Top brass apparently wants them, and law enforcement officials have said they’ll benefit both officers and civilians. Police departments, though not in Cincinnati, have scrambled to sweep up federal government grants to implement body camera programs. And all of this makes sense, considering the public is broadly in favor of them.

Yet earlier this month in Boston, the city’s Police Patrolman’s Association tried to put a halt to a body camera rollout after officers refused to volunteer for a pilot program. The city had previously reached an agreement stating participation would be voluntary, but when no officers came forward, the mayor said he’d push ahead and assign the devices to officers. The police union and city briefly sparred over which party had violated the terms of the contract, but Police Commissioner William Evans later confirmed to HuffPost that the Police Patrolman’s Association had failed to obstruct the process.

“One hundred officers have been selected to participate in the [body-worn camera] pilot program,” he said. “The officers were selected by an independent party … who will be performing the evaluation at the end of the pilot period.”

Nobody is eager to be put under constant surveillance on the job, so some of this resistance may be logical, says Jay Stanley, senior policy analyst with the ACLU’s Speech, Privacy, and Technology Project. Considering the nature of police work, however, the public is always likely to be less sympathetic to their expectations and demands.

“Police officers have been granted the power by the community to use brutal and even in some circumstances deadly force,” Stanley told HuffPost. “So with great power comes the need for great checks and balances.”

And body cameras aren’t the only issue police unions are stalling.

A union in San Antonio recently fought back against an attempt by city officials to give the police chief greater power to reprimand repeat misconduct by his officers. Union leaders sought additional compensation ― beyond the current contract’s 14 percent pay increase over the next four years ― for agreeing to the higher standards. As it stands now, misconduct cases among cops in the city effectively disappear after two years.

Officers later voted for a version that didn’t include the reforms, which is now headed to the City Council for approval, amid outcry from local activists.

Police unions have been equally intransigent in Seattle, where officers in July overwhelmingly rejected a new labor contract with the city that would have included both wage hikes and accountability measures. The police department there has been under intense scrutiny over its failure to remedy unconstitutional policing practices as part of a 2012 consent decree between the Justice Department and the city. Earlier this month, a federal judge issued a harsh rebuke of the union, declaring from the bench that “black lives matter.”

Unions aren’t in the business of public opinion, of course. They’re intended to serve as unapologetic, unwavering advocates for police officers.

“Bad PR? The hell with it,” Lichtenstein said. “Union leaders want to consolidate their base and get re-elected in the next election.”

But just because unions may be acting in an entirely predictable way doesn’t make it any less concerning to those who see reform as an integral step toward restoring public confidence and trust in policing.

“When it comes to policy, all too often we have seen police unions pushing for officers to be given special treatment when it comes to investigations of critical incidents,” Stanley said. “That is something that police departments should not be able to do.”


I say, "No camera and sound, NO GUN."

Why else would bobsal drop 2 full pages of spam to cover up what I said? So I will ask again, how is BLM blowing up a gas station anything more than an act of terrorism, and how is BLM running down the streets looking for white people to beat up not racism?

And why isn't Bob being suspended for violating rule number 6?

He does so every day several times a day... Seems to be two different standards being applied here... one for the left and one for the right.

I don't even care... I just want to hear why BLM blowing up a gas station isn't a terrorist act, and why BLACK LIVES MATTER hunting down white people to beat down isn't racist.

Heres one for you -

Fan rioting after a Giants win:




And almost all 'white'. Where's the freaking cops?????

I really can't tell what color Giants fans are bobsal. And nobody seems to be inside whatever they are burning. Sooo again. How is BLM blowing up a gas station, with people inside, not an act of terrorism? How is Black Lives Matter hunting down white people to beat up not racism?

How nice, you know I answered Bob by telling him he should answer your question but that post also was removed... And Bob claims not to be a moderator or not to be in bed with a moderator he's having my post removed as fast as I post them... goes to show you that when they argue about no one is thumbing up and down or posts being removed it just proves they are all a bunch of petty losers who can dish it out but can't take it... juvenal Junior High School crapola.

You see it's a power trip in the life of a person who obviously has very little power over anything.

I'm going to time this once a long it takes him to delete it.

I thought you were English only.

The Gang that couldn't shoot straight.

Indiana man mistakenly shot by cop: 'Why did you shoot me?'

Source: Associated Press

Indiana man mistakenly shot by cop: 'Why did you shoot me?'

Updated 4:04 pm, Friday, August 26, 2016


INDIANAPOLIS (AP) — An Indianapolis man who was mistakenly shot by a police officer responding to an armed robbery said Friday that he didn't know officers had arrived at his home until he was blinded by their flashlights after being shot.

Carl Williams, a 48-year-old postal worker, said at a news conference that he was in his garage with his handgun at his right side early Tuesday awaiting police when he was shot, apparently just as officers were arriving.

"I knew the police where there after I got shot by them, after I had about three million spotlights in my face," he said. "... The only thing I can remember is intense pain, falling on the ground and telling the police officers 'I am the homeowner. Why did you shoot me?"

Williams called 911 to report that a young man had pointed a gun at his wife in their driveway and demanded her car keys. She threw the keys at the gunman, ran into the house and told her husband, who entered their garage armed.


Read more: http://www.chron.com/news/crime/article/Indianapolis-man-mistakenly-shot-by-police-out-of-9186696.php

http://able2know.org/topic/305632-1

Well, I asked about 3 times how BLM blowing up a gas station is not an act of terrorism, and I asked three times how it's not racist for Black Lives Matter to hunt white people to beat up. I guess I will just have to keep asking the same question until I get an answer, or a point across.

NH trooper pleads guilty to beating driver after chase

Manaco receives deferred sentence


Andrew Monaco, a former New Hampshire state trooper looks around the courtroom Thursday Aug. 25, 2016 in Nashua, N.Andrew Monaco, a former New Hampshire state trooper looks around the courtroom Thursday Aug. 25, 2016 in Nashua, N.H. Monaco pleaded guilty to three simple assault charges stemming from his use of force in the arrest of Richard Simone Jr. on May 11, following a 50-mile pursuit through Massachusetts and New Hampshire. (Don Himsel/The Telegraph via AP, Pool)

By Holly Ramer
Associated Press

Posted Aug. 25, 2016 at 3:15 PM
Updated Aug 25, 2016 at 4:16 PM

NASHUA — A former New Hampshire state trooper caught on video beating a man who led officers on a two-state car chase was given a deferred jail sentence Thursday after pleading guilty to three simple assault charges.

Then-trooper Andrew Monaco was arrested in July on charges stemming from his use of force in the arrest of Richard Simone Jr. on May 11, following a 50-mile pursuit from Holden, Massachusetts, to Nashua. Video captured by a TV news helicopter shows Simone stepping out of his pickup truck, kneeling and placing his hands on the ground as officers assault him.

Assistant Attorney General Susan Morrell said Monaco punched and kneed Simone 12 times in 20 seconds. But Morrell said a deferred and suspended 12-month sentence was appropriate given Monaco's instant remorse and willingness to take responsibility.

Monaco told a supervisor at the scene he knew his actions were wrong; he resigned from the police force a few days after his arrest. As part of his sentence, the 32-year-old Monaco agreed to perform community service, receive anger management counseling and never work in law enforcement again.

"When you talk about events around the country, there are very few, if any police officers who've stood up in court, admitted what they did was wrong, what they did was a crime and what they did should disqualify them from being a police officer," she said.

Joseph Flynn, 32, of the Massachusetts State Police, also faces charges in the case. A pre-trial conference is set for October.

Monaco was a state trooper for four years. In a brief statement Thursday, he apologized to his fellow officers and the public, but not to Simone. He said he could not explain why he behaved in a way he had always promised himself he would not.

"I was unable to separate the events that occurred during the pursuit from my conduct during the arrest," he said.

An attorney for Simone, who is jailed in Massachusetts on several driving-related charges, said Monaco deserved to spend time behind bars. He described lingering health problems his client endures, including blurry vision, and said the sentence sends a message that there are two sets of rules, one for the public and one for police officers.

"He's (Simone's) explained to his daughter that he broke the law and he has his punishment coming," attorney Joe Comenzo said. "But he's having a very hard time explaining to her how this trooper is going to walk out of this court room today. She saw this police officer brutually beat up her dad for no apparent reason, and he doesn't know how to explain it."

Attorney General Joseph Foster disagreed, saying many first-time offenders do not serve jail time for simple assault nor do they lose their careers, as Monaco did.

But Comenzo said Monaco's willingness to relinquish his law enforcement credentials were likely a moot point given that he'd probably not be able to get another police job since the video was widely circulated. As for Monaco's community service requirement, Comenzo told the judge, "He had a community service job, your honor. He was a police officer."


A GOOD cop story.



What an HONEST mouthful!!!

So, how is blowing up a gas station with people inside not terrorism? How is hunting white people to beat up not racism?

Bob can't post unless he can find something to cut and paste...and on this he won't be able answer you cause he knows he can't find a position to counter you.

I was reserving judgement on the swimmers in Rio even though most of the media bought the Rio cops story. But some of the media went to Rio and checked up on the official police version of the story. Guess what? The rest room they were supposed to have trashed showed no damage or where anything had been replaced. And witnesses said the cops did indeed point guns at the American swimmers and demand money. The only part of the cops story that was true was that the paper post had been ripped off the wall. And this wasent the only case of Rio police robbing Olympic participants.