US Man Raped By Police – Then Billed For It


You know what shocks me more than the “rape” itself? The fact that only 84 people had watched that video before me.

If stuff like that doesn’t go viral, it’s no wonder the Police State of America is becoming normalised. Mind you, that video has an awful lot of competition. Try googling “Police Brutality” youtube and you’ll get around 5 million hits (I just got 4,960,000) so I suppose the discerning observer of the Police State has their work cut out trying to keep up with it all.

Are all those videos about violent American Police? No, only about 90% are exclusively American and I do concede that the results are slanted by the fact that the technology (including access to youtube) is much more likely to be available to the American witnesses and victims than to, say, their Chinese equivalents. But you can also find (a handful of) examples from other “western” nations including the UK, France, Australia and even Sweden, where, of course, the technology is just as prevalent.

That handful of examples from other parts of the “free world” only serves to emphasise just how serious the problem has become in the “Land of The Free”. I’m sure there’s a PhD waiting for the first to make a statistical comparison of the rates of Police Brutality and levels of Incarceration in and around the so-called “democratic” world.

Watching a random sample of the youtube videos is deeply depressing as well as promoting righteous anger (and occasionally incandescent rage), so I don’t recommend it if you have medical or psychological issues. But it is also profoundly educational.

After a while, you begin to recognise patterns. The first to strike me was how many of the state employed thugs have shaven heads and look like regular users of steroids. I’d gamble a moderate sum on the outcome of a random drug test should anyone dare to set one up. If my intuition is right, the steroids might have an important role in the level and prevalence of the aggressive attitudes and physical abuse. Steroids are well-known to promote such attitudes in regular users.

Here’s a couple that illustrate the Steroid look…

first this footage caught on CCTV within what I take to be police premises… (which means they knew they were being filmed but even that didn’t deter them)

jump forward to about 1 min 10 seconds to see the unprovoked attack by the steroidal cop on this teenage girl walking away from an incident in this one:

this one features another steroidal cop punching a mentally handicapped woman on a bus – again despite full awareness that he was being filmed:

Perhaps the least steroidal ones (indicated by retention of hair?) retain some human-like intelligence. This one, for example shows signs of understanding that performing his crime in front of a live camera is sub-optimal, and has even worked out how to switch it off before launching an attack, and then switch it back on! Like this:

it’s good to know, though, that the citizens aren’t as passive as the lack of public outrage implies. Checkout out these citizens’ resistance to the bullies at the illegal immigration checkpoints last year:

But the prize for the cleverest “resistance” (only just short of “These are not the Droids you’re looking for”) is this “threaten em with the bible” tactic:

All the above are excellent examples of why I’ve been banging on about Trusted Surveillance for the best part of a decade. The Police have definitely got the message. Which is why it’s hardly surprising that the Police State Bullies in some of the more primitive States have been doing their best to criminalise videos like the above. For example:

But elsewhere, Police are beginning to get the more positive message – that recording everything (deliberately rather than accidentally) both constrains police brutality and increases citizen compliance. In Rialto California, where they’ve been trying this out for a year or so, complaints have already dropped 88% and the use of Force (by the cops) by 60%. Now that’s a real improvement in Homeland Security…

Today is October 10th, 2012 and I am ready to go to prison.

Thus spake Leah Lynn Plante just over a year ago.

The Empire obviously broke her spirit because they let her out again a few days later, while the other two refuseniks who were kidnapped by the State at the same time, were only released five months later, when the judge admitted that the State bullying had failed to break their spirits and that he could see no further point in detaining them.

Leah, it is rumoured, co-operated with the grand jury and has thus, apparently, since been shunned by her erstwhile anarchist companions. I, for one, salute her bravery. Not many of us would dare to confront the Bully State to the extent she did and the fact that their bullying and intimidation appears to have frightened her into compliance is certainly no basis for condemnation or even disdain.

But I’d be fascinated to know what she revealed. I’m betting it was buggerall because she obviously isn’t any kind of terrorist – unlike the state employed thugs who broke into her home, kidnapped her and locked her up in the name of the scandalous “War on Terror”

So…read the statement, watch the video, then ask yourself, “who, exactly, are the terrorists in this story?”

here’s a more detailed discussion of the implications of what the modern McCarthyites are up to:

now consider the irony of the source of that video. And in case you distrust the message because you might distrust the messenger, remember that the story is on the public record because at least one “proper” newspaper did report the facts and even the negative and seditious comments by Neil Fox, president of the National Lawyer’s guild. It’s also quite well summarised, with references,here as usual. So we know it really happened. Yet hardly any of us DO know…

I was, initially, concerned that this was old news. A year old to be almost precise. Then I thought, well I didn’t know about it before I “stumbled” it tonight and it’s right in my target zone. Then I looked around for other coverage of what ought to have been fairly major police state outrage and found almost nothing. Fewer than 150 people have watched that video before now, so you’re an early adopter. I couldn’t find any evidence of more than a few thousand views of other versions of the same thing and, as for the mainstream, as usual, nada… Indeed just google “leah-lynn plante” “grand-jury” which terms ought to appear in any serious reporting of the story. It returned a little under 37,000 results, none of which included, in the first five pages, any recognisable commercial or state media. Bizarrely not even that Seattle Times piece appears in the early pages and it definitely contains those search terms!

Somehow they’ve managed to hide the story in plain sight. Which is why it’s probably as much news to you as it was to me.

I find this particular disturbing. One of the observations I made, back in 2005, in the first comment I wrote for my original “Police State of America” collection was that one feature that gave us “hope” for the American condition was that – at least – all its problems were being reported by other Americans, revealing a considerable level of resistance and dissent.

Will we now have to start relying on the Russians to host discussion of the continuing American descent into State brutality against its own citizens?

NSA Backlash limps into action


Kudos to the Real News for that interview.

I’m still surprised and disappointed at the miserably subdued backlash against what the American authoritarians and their poodles have been getting away with against the citizens of the world.

But perhaps I’m just impatient and the Resistance is building. Today I hear that there are demonstrations in the streets of Washington, under the banner “Stop Watching Us“. No word yet on how many turned up.

That matters. If it’s a handful, the regime will read that as a green light to continue. It would need to be a several hundred thousand to have serious political impact.

Authoritarian defenders are crawling around trying to find ways to defend the indefensible. One of the most cringeworthy was Cameron’s puerile posing at yesterday’s EU summit

“What Snowden is doing – and to an extent, what the newspapers are doing in helping him doing what he is doing – is frankly signalling to people who mean to do us harm how to evade and avoid intelligence and surveillance,” he said. “That is not going to make our world safer.”

What the fuck has that got to do with listening in on Angela Merkel’s private telephone conversations?

The answer, of course, is “nothing whatsoever” but they haven’t got any kind of justification for that abuse, so, instead they fall back on a childlike reference to the reason they routinely give for snooping on everyone else, in the hope that somehow, the “bewildered herd” will conflate the two issues and conclude that spying on 35 world leaders is all necessarily part of the “War on Terror”

Well those 35 and many other members of the international political classes are beginning to smell the coffee. And they’re beginning to feel their blood pressure mounting as they take on board the extent of American (and British) hubris. This has already resulted in growing demands for NSA-proof communication systems between them and, as you’ll have seen in that Video, countries like Brazil are going a whole stage further and demanding communication channels which bypass America altogether.

This is a very welcome development for the politicians at least. Let’s hope they remember that any secure sauce considered good enough for the political goose is equally good for the citizen ganders.

None of the so-called “Revelations” are actually new…
Coincidentally, “Nothing Whatsoever” is also the answer to the question: how much does the average politician, including the British Prime Minister, understand about “Security”? He and many others we’ve seen squirming in recent weeks have frequently repeated that absurd argument quoted above.

As I’ve pointed out elsewhere, NOTHING in the Snowden revelations is new or unexpected. We have been able to read about it for years, and not just in conspiracy fetish forums where they don’t believe Man has ever walked on the Moon, but in well documented and highly respected sources like the trilogy of exposes written by James Bamford over the past 30 years (“Puzzle Palace” 1983, “Body of Secrets” 2002 and, with specific reference to all the web snooping, “Shadow Factory” 2009)

All Snowden has added to the picture is detail (like the name of the relevant program – PRISM) and some notion of scale. Mostly he has simply confirmed what we’d read in Shadow Factory. (Actually, in my case, I was 2/3 of the way through that book when the Snowden revelations hit the street. That made it somewhat more pressing and relevant!)

So the notion that the “evil-doers” didn’t already know this is utterly stupid and exactly the kind of misapprehension that those who do understand Security would NOT be labouring under. Such naiveté might have been widespread among terrorists at the turn of the century but after 12 years of targeted drone strikes and other successful assassination attempts, the spooks KNOW that their main genuine targets are very aware of the need for secure communications and, almost certainly, avoid using the web altogether (at least not for operational communications).

The only “terrorists” who are going to be caught through their web activity are the terrorist equivalent of those “script kiddies” who created a bunch of irritating but mostly harmless malware in the Nineties and Naughties. They’re the “wannabe jihadists” who, even if they aren’t caught, are rarely going to have the aptitude and experience to pose real threats.

Exposing the scale of the NSA dragnet has, therefore, done “nothing whatsoever” to alert the real bad guys. Which is not, however, to say that the exposure doesn’t help the terrorists. It does, but obviously the spooks haven’t bothered to tell the Prime Minister and other politicians how. Perhaps they think it’s too complicated for him and the rest of the bewildered herd to grok. Or perhaps they’re too embarrassed to admit that they’ve shot themselves in both feet.

How Snowden HAS Helped the Terrorists…
Here’s how Snowden’s high-profile confirmation is going to make life easier for the terrorists and the few other genuine anti-social bastards (like the paedophile network, or people traffickers) we really do need the security services to try to keep tabs on.

At the moment, none of the serious targets will ever be caught discussing anything (significant) online in plain text. If they use the web at all they’ll be using adequate encryption, almost certainly beyond NSA’s capacity to break. But it’s unlikely they’ll even use much in the way of encrypted emails because they will also be aware that even if their messages cannot be read, traffic analysis and the so-called “metadata” we keep hearing about provides a huge amount of significant data on its own, even without knowing the content.

The NSA have huge programs designed to trace the networks of connections between ANY given bunch of targets. As you can read in that link, they (and others) can easily create ad hoc network diagrams for any given targets. But they live in a “target rich environment”, so they have to spend most of their time focussed on those most likely to be sharing sensitive data. Thus they’re most interested in the connections between users of encrypted email. Because, they reason, if the senders are hiding something, it is probably worth reading, and definitely worth knowing who is talking to who.

And, at the moment, tracing those connections and compiling the relevant “organisation chart” is relatively simple. I doubt if, even globally, more than a hundred thousand email users regularly securely encrypt their messages. And mapping the links for that hundred thousand or so is well within the NSA reach.

But a major consequence of Snowden’s leaks is already beginning to be visible as the number of users of serious encryption begins to rise. And some significant political and commercial muscle is going into the mix. For example, Brazil, as we’ve heard, is now demanding a secure email system for their politicians and it’s quite likely they’ll make it available and recommend it for their citizens.

German entrepreneurs, meanwhile, have already come up with a partial solution and appeared within hours of the Merkel revelations, to exploit the advertising opportunity for their SecuSmart micro SD card “encryption dongle” – available for all smartphone users and in use by the German Government since July; which might be why we’re now hearing that Merkel was targeted from 2002 up until June this year. Once the card was fitted, NSA would have lost their ability to bug her – although not necessarily their ability to track who she was calling or being called by. Any communications between two users fitted with those cards can at least be confident that the content of their conversations is not being overheard (providing, of course, that the phones themselves haven’t been tampered with and they’re not bugged in any other way)

We can confidently expect a rash of genuinely secure phone and email products to appear on web pages near you in the near future. Who knows, Google and some of the other major players might even tweak their own services to make them snoop proof (by giving users the ability to add their own secret keys).

So there is a very real prospect that within, say, 5 years, instead of a hundred thousand secure emailers, there will be a hundred million and, as any fule kno, the complexity of a network diagram is proportional not to the number of nodes, but the square of that number (“Metcalfe’s Law”). So the NSA task isn’t going to be a mere thousand times more difficult, but around a million. And even their shiny new Utah Repository isn’t going to be able to cope with that.

Which means that it will shortly become much safer for terrorists and others to use their own encrypted emails. Fish are always safer swimming in the sea. Up till now, they’ve been forced to swim in a rather small pond and have, thus, been easy to target with a hand-held net. Snowden’s revelations, with the help of those media not afraid to talk truth to power, have already achieved far more exposure than Bamford’s. His book is currently languishing at number 72,169 in the Amazon sales rankings, which I reckon must mean that probably fewer people have so far read his (much more detailed) exposure than my guesstimate of the number of users who routinely encrypt their mail.

So the sharks we really do need to keep an eye on are about to get the comforting camouflage of another hundred million or so fish and the reasonably sized Sea they need to swim in more safely. This is what they call, in the trade, Blowback. Nice one NSA…

Is this the “Proud America” War Hero – John Wrana – fought for?

I’m horrified by the thought of his last thoughts – as he painfully died from an overdose of its authoritarian TLC.

Assuming the facts of the case to be as described (and I’ve, so far, found no contradiction or rebuttal) I can think of no clearer case for a Lynch Mob. The state employed bullies who did this should die, and preferably by similar means. Their attack on an elderly and confused citizen, however “aggressive” he might have been trying to be, is completely indefensible and utterly unforgivable. This is the Police State of America, in full technicolour metal jackets.

And are we really saying that none of those professionally trained and fully armed thugs – apparently in full riot gear (including riot shields) – were capable of assessing the threat intelligently and disarming a “wobbly” 95-year-old without resorting to a fucking taser??? You cowardly vicious trigger-happy subhuman fascist motherfuckers. We need a new circle of hell just for you…

And how or why do they get away with this shit?

Because the American mainstream media – with the honourable exception, on this occasion, of the Chicago Tribune – don't even bother to report it. Bear in mind that this happened 27 July – nearly two weeks ago. Plenty of time for the Fourth Estate to get it’s shameful act together. Bear in mind too, that this has already been ruled by the coroner as a Police HOMICIDE, not just a horrible accident.

Yet below, for example, is the first page of google results I got when I went looking for corroboration. You will look in vain for the New York Times (Liberal? Yeah right), The Washington Post, The LA Times, The SF Chronicle or any of those big titles that used to have a proud journalistic tradition. (You’d almost think that the media were somehow collaborating with the Police State. Surely that can’t be true…)
google first page results John Wrana 95 year old tasering

And I really did look hard for evidence of coverage by the big boys. I used google site search to find any mention of John Wrana on the NY Times site, LA Times, and Washington Post. All Nada. Their own internal searches returned Zero results for “John Wrana” as well. All I could find was this miserable minimalist treatment by the SFC whose headline makes it look like the story is about faulty bean bags!

The only “innocent” explanation I can come up with to explain their apparent complete indifference to this outrage is that there are now so many stories like this, that it’s no longer news. And if that’s within a million miles of the truth, America is in really deep doodoo.

As to what I truly hope was not going through John Wrana’s dying mind:
“Me and my brothers in arms fought and died to prevent this kind of authority ever coming to my own country…”

I’m going to keep saying this until someone realises I’m being deadly serious. We MUST change the rules.
Citizen – Innocent Until Proved Guilty
Authority – Guilty Until Proved Innocent

How the Police State Mentality Ruins Even Good Ideas…

(Some of) the opponents of this particular example of the Police State of America are wrong. This is NOT a breach of the Fourth Amendment.
Although an obviously unreasonable and disproportionate method, it does not constitute “unreasonable search and seizure” in the legal sense, providing they have probable cause, which, in cases of DUI ought to be obvious…

It is, however, unquestionably, a blatant breach of the Fifth. They are forcing citizens to incriminate themselves despite their explicit refusal to consent. So, when these cases reach the Supremes, assuming that they haven’t all gone over to the dark side, the police assaults and forcible blood sampling will be struck down, as they obviously deserve to be.

The shame is that they were pursuing a worthy cause, but the bully instinct kicked in to ensure they fucked it up. This is what happens to a country when war criminal political leaders mandate torture and prolonged detention without trials and nothing happens to correct or even acknowledge those political crimes. If they can get away with it…

DUI is a vastly more serious and effective threat than terrorism.

More Americans are killed every year, by drunk drivers than all other violent causes. Just under ten thousand a year (pdf). Against 8874 homicides by gun. Terrorists, of course, haven’t managed to kill more than a few dozen American Citizens a year, (31.1 on average), since their peak year of 2001. Which is less than 10% of those Americans who die at the hands of their own Police Incidentally, the “War on Terror” is obviously working. Immediately after 2001 the Terrorist Kill Rate (against Americans) was reduced to about the same level as Whooping Cough, (which killed 26 Americans in 2010) where it has remained ever since. Imagine what they could achieve if they spent the same trillions on preventing road deaths. Or Global Hunger and preventable diseases…

They already make it a condition of the application for a Driving Licence, that if suspected of DUI, drivers MUST submit themselves to a breathalyzer test OR face a driving ban of 1 year. The opponents of that law argue a similar case to my objection to forced blood sampling: it is coercion intended to persuade citizens to incriminate themselves.

That is true. Like “plea bargaining”, it just looks better because there is no overt physical bullying involved. And if there is no prima facie evidence that an offence took place; i.e. no probable cause, then I would also favour refusal to comply.

The situation is dramatically different, however, in those cases where there is good reason to suspect DUI. Assuming the alleged high conviction rate of the (in my view, illegally) sampled victims was not merely another feature of the corruption in the American legal system, there obviously was reasonable evidence of DUI.

Now, in that situation, it is not dissimilar to having cctv footage of, say, a drug store hold up where the thief makes off with the contents of the till and is apprehended by the police as he tries to run away. No one, presumably, is going to argue that the police aren’t entitled to search the suspect for weapons and the stolen goods. Nor, if he refuses to comply, is anyone likely to object to his subsequent arrest and forcible search. All under the sensible terms of “probable cause”.

So what’s the difference, if the police dash-cam records a car swerving bizarrely as they follow it down the highway, and eventually record it smashing into a parked car? We have probable cause, better recorded, we hope, than the cctv, and an obvious offence.

In those circumstances – and it cannot be stressed too highly that it must be ONLY in those circumstances (not applicable, for example, for “random” stops or where the cop merely “claims” to have smelt alcohol in the vehicle) – we WANT the police to arrest the bugger. And, given the prima facie evidence, it is perfectly reasonable to suspect the involvement of alcohol and request a breathalyzer sample.

If the suspect refuses to comply in those circumstances, I would argue that the suspect is in precisely the same situation I regard the authorities to be in permanently. i.e. they are suspected of a crime with strong circumstantial evidence to sustain the suspicion. They now have the ability to prove themselves innocent, with the breathalyzer. If they choose not to take that opportunity, I have no problem assuming their guilt.

The key issue is the quality of evidence on which the “probable cause” is based. That is a matter for a jury to decide. If they see the video evidence and cannot figure out why the cop stopped the suspect, then the suspect walks free, regardless of refusal to comply. But if it’s bleedin’ obvious, from the evidence presented to the jury, why the suspect was stopped and that any reasonable person would have suspected DUI, then the jury can reasonably decide that refusal to comply amounts to a confession of guilt and convict accordingly.

Note the two protections: good quality evidence and, in the event of refused compliance, trial by jury. The good quality evidence is required to prevent abuse of power in the form of police harassment. Trial by jury is required to prevent abuse of power in the form of judicial collaboration with rogue police.

Put all that in place and we begin to have what looks like an effective and honest legal system. Don’t hold your breath…

Heather Brooke’s Successful battle to expose political corruption

I concur…

Heather Brooke’s Homepage

Why We Fight (Eugene Jarecki)

depressing to find that this has just 5 “likes” on Stumbleupon and has only been viewed 80,125 times on youtube despite having been available, free, for over a year. This degree of apathy explains how they continue to get away with it. They are immune because “We The People” are indifferent. Sad, sad, sad…