Archive | July 4th, 2015

Fifteen Most Outrageous Responses by Police After Killing Unarmed People

By Bill Quigley


Police kill a lot of unarmed people. So far in 2015, as many as 100 unarmed people have been killed by police. Here are fifteen of the most outrageous reasons given by police to justify killing unarmed people in the last twelve months.

First, a bit of background. So far in 2015, there have been around 400 fatal police shootings already; one in six of those killings, 16 percent, were of unarmed people, 49 had no weapon at all, and 13 had toys, according to theWashington Post. Of the police killings this year, less than 1 percent have resulted in the officer being charged with a crime. The Guardian did a study which included killings by Tasers and found that 102 people killed by police so far in 2015 were unarmed and that unarmed black people are twice as likely to be killed by police as whites.

One: He Was Dancing in the Street and Walking With a Purpose. On June 9, 2015, an unarmed man, Ryan Bollinger, was shot by police in Des Moines after “walking with a purpose” toward the police car after he exited his vehicle. This followed a low-speed chase which began when Bollinger was observed dancing in the street and behaving erratically. The deceased was shot by the police through the rolled up cruiser window. The murder is under investigation.

Two: Thought It Was My Taser. An unarmed man, Eric Harris, ran from the police in Tulsa, Oklahoma, on April 2, 2015. After he was shot in the back by a Taser by one officer and was on the ground, another 73-year-old volunteer reserve officer shot and killed him, all captured by video. While dying, he was yelling that he was losing his breath, to which one of the officers responded “F*ck your breath.” The police said the officer thought he was shooting his Taser and “inadvertently discharged his service weapon.” The officer has been charged with second degree manslaughter. Running away from the police so often provokes police overreaction that the aggressive police response has several names, including the “foot tax” and the “running tax.”

Three: Naked Man Refused to Stop. A naked, unarmed, mentally ill Air Force veteran who had served in Afghanistan, Anthony Hill, was shot and killed March 9, 2015, by police in DeKalb County, Georgia. Police said he had refused an order to stop. The killing is under investigation.

Four: Not Going to Say. On March 6, 2015, police in Aurora, Colorado, shot and killed unarmed Naeschylus Vinzant while taking him into custody. For the last three months, while the investigation into the killing continues, the police have refused to say what compelled the officer to shoot Vinzant.

Five: Five Police Felt Threatened by One Unarmed Homeless Man. March 1, 2015, Los Angeles police shot and killed an unarmed homeless man, Charly Leundeu Keunang, after five officers went to his tent and struggled with him. One unarmed homeless man threatened five armed LAPD officers? Los Angeles police have killed about one person a week since 2000. An investigation is ongoing.

Six: My Taser Didn’t Work. On February 23, 2015, an unarmed man, Daniel Elrod, was shot twice in the back and once in the shoulder and killed in Omaha, Nebraska, after he tried to climb a tree and jump a fence to escape the police, who suspected him of robbery. Police said a Taser was deployed, but did not work, and Elrod ignored their demands to get down on the ground and show his hands, and they felt threatened. Video was not made available, and the officer who killed Elrod later resigned. This was thesecond person the officer had killed. No criminal charges were filed.

Seven: Armed With a Broom. Lavall Hall’s mother called the police in Miami Gardens February 15, 2015, and asked for help for her son, who was mentally ill. Lavall Hall, five foot four inches tall, walked outside with a broom and was later shot and killed by police, who said he had failed to comply with instructions and engaged them with an object. The killing is still under investigation.

Eight: Throwing Rocks. On February 10, 2015, an unarmed man, Antonio Zambrano-Montes, was fired at 17 times and killed by police in Kennewick, Washington. A video of his killing has been viewed more than 2 million times. Officers said he had been throwing rocks at cars, ran away, and then turned around.

Nine: Taser Worked but He Didn’t Stop Moving. On February 2, 2015, a Hummelstown, Pennsylvania, police officer shot unarmed David Kassick in the back with a Taser. When Kassick went to the ground on his stomach, the officer shot him twice in the back with her gun, killing him. The officer said Kassick, who was running away from a traffic stop, was told to show his hands and not move but continued to try to remove the Taser prongs from his back, and the officer thought he was reaching for a gun. The officer has been charged with homicide.

Ten: Car Going 11 Miles an Hour Was Going to Kill Me.Denver police fired 8 times at unarmed Jessica Hernandez, 17, who died January 16 after being hit by four bullets. The police said she drove too close to them as she was trying to get away and may have tried to run them down, so they shot into the windshield and driver’s windows. The police said the car may have reached 11 miles per hour in the 16 feet it traveled before hitting a fence. The police were not charged.

Eleven: Armed With a Spoon. Dennis Grigsby, an unarmed, mentally ill man holding a soup spoon, was shot in the chest and killed in a neighbor’s garage by Texarkana Police December 15, 2015. The killing is under investigation.

Twelve: Armed With Prescription Bottle. Rumain Brisbon, a 34-year-old unarmed man, was shot twice and killed by police in Phoenix on December 2, 2014, after he ran away, was caught, and struggled with the officer, who mistook a prescription pill bottle in Brisbon’s pocket for a gun. The police officer was not charged.

Thirteen: It Was an Accident. On November 20, 2014, a New York City police officer fired into a stairwell and killed unarmed Akai Gurley. The officer, who was charged with manslaughter, is expected to say he accidently fired his gun.

Fourteen: Don’t Mention It. On November 12, 2014, an unarmed, handcuffed inmate was shot multiple times in the head, neck, chest, and arms by officers while fighting with another handcuffed inmate in the High Desert State Prison in Carson City, Nevada. His family was not told, and did not know he had been shot until three days later when they claimed his body at a mortuary.

Fifteen: Armed With Toy Gun. John Crawford was unarmed in a Walmart store in Beavercreek, Ohio, on August 4, 2014, when he picked up an unloaded BB gun. When officers arrived, they say they ordered him to put down the gun and started shooting, hitting him at least twice and killing him. In a widely viewed video, Mr. Crawford can be seeing dropping the BB gun, running away, and being shot while unarmed. Likewise, Cleveland police shot and killed an unarmed 12-year-old boy, Tamir Rice, who was playing with a toy pellet gun on November 22, 2014. Police said they shouted verbal commands from inside their vehicle in the two seconds before they shot him twice. In both these cases, the police story of shouting warnings and orders looks quite iffy at best.

These are the responses of police authorities, who face less than one chance in a hundred of being charged when they kill people, even unarmed people. These outrages demand massive change in the way lethal force is used, reported, justified, and prosecuted.

Posted in USAComments Off on Fifteen Most Outrageous Responses by Police After Killing Unarmed People

Haiti far from ready to receive those deported from Dominican Republic

By Milo Milfort
Haiti far from ready to receive those deported from Dominican Republic

Haiti’s ‘Reception Center for Returnees’ at Malpasse consists of this flimsy plywood hut on several acres of bleached white gravel. Photo: Milo Milfort/Haïti Liberté

Large sign, announcing a non-existent 'Reception Center for Returnees,' is the extent of Haitian government preparation for the tens of thousands of deportees expected from the Dominican Republic in coming days and weeks. Photo: Milo Milfort/Haïti Liberté

Large sign, announcing non-existent ‘Reception Center for Returnees,’ is the extent of Haitian government preparation for the tens of thousands of deportees expected from the Dominican Republic in coming days and weeks. Photo: Milo Milfort/Haïti Liberté

Haiti’s ‘Reception Center for Returnees’ at Malpasse consists of this flimsy plywood hut on several acres of bleached white gravel. Photo: Milo Milfort/Haïti Liberté

Malpasse, Haiti, Jun. 23, 2015—”To facilitate the process, we hope that the crossings [deportation points] are at Malpasse and Ouanaminthe,” said Haiti’s Communication Minister Rothchild François Jr. on Friday, June 19, 2015.

“The Contingency Plan which was being prepared is ready and functioning,” said the government spokesman.

In May 2015, the Defense Ministry announced the Contingency Plan to receive undocumented Haitians who were to be deported from the neighboring Dominican Republic starting in June.

Two receiving locations had been planned to accommodate the stateless persons from the Dominican Republic, François said.

The repatriations had in fact already started at Malpasse. The government was aware of them. “We received [on June 19] at Malpasse 23 people who are in fact returnees,” said Ariel Henri, Haiti’s Interior Minister.

Yet at Malpasse, nothing is ready.

Along the border road leading from Jimani to Croix des Bouquets near Port-au-Prince, there is a large empty expanse of gravel and sand. On it are two dump trucks, a backhoe, a steam shovel, a Haitian flag, a plastic tent, and a mobile toilet. This is where the deportees are to be received.

At the entrance to the lot, a sign says: “Republic of Haiti. Ministry of Defense. Corps of Military Engineering.” Below it, alongside the Defense Ministry logo, it reads in larger letters: “Reception Center for Returnees.”

Some goats, a dog, and a female visitor are keeping company the three members of the Corps of Engineers on hand.

Under the soldiers’ shirts, one can see a gray T-shirt with “Ministry of Defense” printed on it. They also wear boots and multi-pocket blue pants.

“In the face of duty” is the phrase at the bottom of the sign behind which the soldiers are stationed. But what duty is the sign talking about? Is there truly a Welcome Center?

“There’s nothing here,” says a member of the Corps of Engineers, sitting with another in a rudimentary temporary plywood shelter in the middle of this wasteland to escape the hot sun. “We are not ready yet.”

From afar, one might mistakenly think that the brand new houses of the Haitian Customs nearby were those built to receive the deportees.

“If they send returnees here, only the President will know what to do with them,” the soldier adds. “We are just here to watch over the equipment.”

The organizations which defend migrants’ rights like the Support Group for the Repatriated and Refugees (GARR) has come to the same conclusion.

“We made many visits and we saw nothing,” lamented Josué Michel, a GARR communications assistant reached by telephone. “Nothing serious has been put in place.”

“Until now, the authorities are only dragging their feet in figuring out how to receive people,” he complained.

The repatriation of undocumented Haitians and Dominicans of Haitian descent began with the beginning of the National Plan for Dominican Regularization on June 17, 2015.

Posted in South AmericaComments Off on Haiti far from ready to receive those deported from Dominican Republic

Statement by the Revolutionary Government of Cuba

By Revolutionary Government of Cuba


Statement by the Revolutionary Government of Cuba

With the reestablishment of diplomatic ties with the United States, the lifting of the blockade, among other issues, will be essential to the ultimate normalization of relations.

On July 1, 2015, the President of the Councils of State and Ministers of the Republic of Cuba, Army General Raúl Castro Ruz, and the President of the United States of America, Barack Obama, exchanged letters through which they confirmed the decision to reestablish diplomatic relations between the two countries and open permanent diplomatic missions in their respective capitals, from July 20, 2015.
That same day, the official opening ceremony of the Embassy of Cuba in Washington will be held, in the presence of a Cuban delegation led by Foreign Minister Bruno Rodríguez Parrilla and composed of distinguished representatives of Cuban society.

By formalizing this step, Cuba and the United States ratified the intention to develop respectful and cooperative relations between both peoples and governments, based on the purposes and principles enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations and International Law, in particular the Vienna Conventions on Diplomatic and Consular Relations.

The Government of Cuba has decided to reestablish diplomatic relations with the United States in full exercise of its sovereignty, invariably committed to the ideals of independence and social justice, and in solidarity with the just causes of the world, and reaffirming each of the principles for which our people have shed their blood and ran all risks, led by the historic leader of the Revolution Fidel Castro Ruz.

With the reestablishment of diplomatic relations and the opening of embassies, the first phase concludes of what will be a long and complex process towards the normalization of bilateral ties, as part of which a set of issues will have to be resolved arising from past policies, still in force, which affect the Cuban people and nation.

There can be no normal relations between Cuba and the United States as long as the economic, commercial and financial blockade that continues to be rigorously applied, causing damages and scarcities for the Cuban people, is maintained, it is the main obstacle to the development of our economy, constitutes a violation of International Law and affects the interests of all countries, including those of the United States.

To achieve normalization it will also be indispensable that the territory illegally occupied by the Guantanamo Naval Base is returned, that radio and television transmissions to Cuba that are in violation of international norms and harmful to our sovereignty cease, that programs aimed at promoting subversion and internal destabilization are eliminated, and that the Cuban people are compensated for the human and economic damages caused by the policies of the United States.

In recalling the outstanding issues to be resolved between the two countries, the Cuban Government recognizes the decisions adopted thus far by President Obama, to exclude Cuba from the list of state sponsors of international terrorism, to urge the U.S. Congress to lift the blockade and to begin to take steps to modify the application of aspects of this policy in exercise of his executive powers.

As part of the process towards the normalization of relations, in turn, the foundations of ties that have not existed between our countries in all their history will need to be constructed, in particular, since the military intervention of the United States 117 years ago, in the independence war that Cuba fought for nearly three decades against Spanish colonialism.

These relations must be founded on absolute respect for our independence and sovereignty; the inalienable right of every State to choose its political, economic, social and cultural system, without interference in any form; and sovereign equality and reciprocity, which constitute inalienable principles of International Law.

The Government of Cuba reiterates its willingness to maintain a respectful dialogue with the Government of the United States and develop relations of civilized coexistence, based on respect for the differences between the two governments and cooperation on issues of mutual benefit.

Cuba will continue immersed in the process of updating its economic and social model, to build a prosperous and sustainable socialism, advance the development of the country and consolidate the achievements of the Revolution.
Havana, July 1, 2015


Posted in South AmericaComments Off on Statement by the Revolutionary Government of Cuba

Crisis and opportunity as EU-Greece standoff comes to a head

Crisis and opportunity as EU-Greece standoff comes to a head

In a major development that threatens the political stability of the European Union and the economic stability of global capitalism, the Greek government led by the Coalition of the Radical Left (SYRIZA) announced last Friday that it would hold a referendum on the harsh terms of a cash-for-austerity deal offered by the “Troika”. The referendum will take place July 5, although there is an outside possibility that it would be canceled in the event of a breakthrough in Troika-Greece negotiations.

The Troika, now often referred to as “the institutions”, is composed of the International Monetary Fund, European Union, and European Central Bank. Since 2009, the Troika has imposed devastating measures that attack the most fundamental rights of poor and working people in Greece – in return for bailout money, which almost all goes directly back to the big banks.

On Tuesday, the country missed a 1.6 billion Euro payment to the IMF. While this is does not technically constitute a default because the money was not due to a private investor, the Greek government is now effectively bankrupt. The country’s credit rating has been downgraded.

Panic is quickly spreading across the economy, and it is far from guaranteed that it will be confined to Greece. European officials denied the Greek government’s request to extend the bailout program, which expired on Tuesday.

After the referendum announcement, huge lines immediately began forming at ATMs across the country, which quickly ran out of cash. The government then announced the extraordinary measures that banks would be closed until the referendum, and a 60 Euro limit would be imposed on ATM withdrawals.

The big financial institutions in Greece continue to operate only because of emergency aid from the ECB, which has so far refused to increase this assistance. Greek authorities are desperate to prevent a run on the banks, but after the missed IMF payment there will be additional pressure on the ECB to cut off aid.

The leadership of the SYRIZA government, which includes the anti-bailout, anti-immigrant party Independent Greeks as a junior partner, finds itself in a dilemma. On the one hand, it received a clear electoral mandate to break the cycle of debt and austerity that has left the Greek working and middle classes destitute. In his speech announcing the referendum, Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras stated that the Troika’s terms: “[W]ill add new unbearable weight to the shoulders of the Greek people, and that will undermine the recovery of the Greek economy and society–not only by fueling uncertainty, but also by further exacerbating social inequalities.”

On the other hand, SYRIZA assured the people that it would not leave the Eurozone, arguing that the Troika was bluffing and could be forced to ascent to a “European debt conference” that would write off much of the country’s debt. In the same speech, Tsipras reaffirmed his government’s commitment to the process of continental capitalist integration by referring to the Troika’s demands as “An ultimatum that contravenes Europe’s founding principles and values. The values of our common European project.”

The SYRIZA government ended up offering major concessions that include regressive taxes, privatizations and pension cuts that blatantly violate its pre-election promises. This proposal was submitted just in time for the June 22 meeting of Eurozone leaders, and it appeared that a deal was imminent. Tsipras and the rest of the leadership hoped that it would be enough to appease the Troika while not going so far that its internal left wing, which is growing in influence, would refuse to vote for it in parliament.

Greek people refuse to accept surrender

In short, the center could not hold. Tsipras’ concessions were widely hailed as a breakthrough, but not unconditionally accepted by the other Eurozone states. The leadership of SYRIZA was not able to sell the concessions to enough of its parliamentarians or Greek society at large.

Upon learning of the terms the government had offered the Troika, SYRIZA members and Deputy Speaker of parliament Alexandros Mitropoulos remarked, “My personal view is that these measures cannot be approved in a vote. They are extreme and against social justice.” Panagiotis Lafazanis, Minister of Productive Reconstruction, Environment and Energy and leader of the Left Platform faction of SYRIZA, was another key voice against concessions. After the referendum was called, he was quick to call for a decisive rejection of the Troika’s terms, saying “[A ‘no’ vote] will be a big yes to a new era of reconstruction and progress” and uniquely refused to accept the media narrative of the Euro or chaos, insisting that the real “dilemma for the people is whether they will live better.”

A referendum was the only way for the SYRIZA leadership to avoid taking responsibility for a Greek exit from the Eurozone while avoiding an open conflict from breaking out within the party’s own ranks.

Underpinning the dissent from the SYRZIA left wing is the proven ability of the Greek working class to engage in militant struggle. The mass movement has been at a low point recently as the center of gravity shifts from the streets to the negotiating table, but the experience of the past several years, and more broadly the entire post-World War Two period of Greek history, affirms the possibility of an explosion.

The day before the missed IMF payment, tens of thousands flooded the streets outside of the parliament to denounce the Troika’s brutal austerity and call for a “no” vote in the referendum. Should this type of mass mobilization continue, poor and working people may quickly find themselves in a position to direct the course of events. It is possible that such a renewed upsurge could go beyond demands relating to the immediate situation and threaten the entire structure of class rule in Greece.

The legitimacy of the Greek state following the overthrow of the military dictatorship in 1974 has in large part been premised on its membership in the “European project” that cements Greece’s place as a developed, western nation. Should the country leave the Eurozone, this rationale would go up in smoke. In a post-exit reorganization of politics, a mobilized working class can intervene forcefully when the question is posed: Who will rule Greece?

A turning point for the European Union

The Troika did little to help Tsipras overcome domestic pressure. In fact, they drove a remarkably hard bargain, refusing to accept the major concessions offered by SYRIZA and even correcting a missing capital letter in their counter proposal. This can be largely attributed to the significant and growing section of the European ruling class that would actually prefer a Greek exit from the Eurozone.

This camp is particularly strong in Germany, the most powerful imperialist state in the European Union. A rift has opened up in recent days between Finance Minister Wolfgang Schaeuble, who seems to prefer a managed Greek exit, with Prime Minister Angela Merkel, who takes a hard line but has overriding political concerns about the political precedent that would be set by a country departing from the Eurozone. The thinking goes that if Greece and possibly other weaker countries are pushed out of the Eurozone, the remaining states would be able to pursue more rapid financial integration without having to deal with the consequences of uneven economic development, particularly as it relates to access to credit.

This, however, comes with a high degree of uncertainty. The U.S. ruling class is strongly against this approach, and both President Obama and Treasury Secretary Jack Lew are intervening in favor of a compromise that prevents a Greek default.

Prime Minister Tsipras has called for a “no” vote in the referendum, but has not posed this in opposition to Greek membership in the Eurozone. The SYRIZA leadership is instead presenting the vote as an opportunity to increase the bargaining power of the government, not set Greece on a radically new course. In fact, in a desperate attempt to reach an agreement before the IMF payment was due, the Greek government sent a proposal to the Troika offering to enter into a new 2-year bailout program in return for a restructuring of debt.

The Communist Party of Greece (KKE), has consistently advocated for a break with the European Union on a socialist basis and has carried out mass mobilizations in recent weeks, but its overall strategy is in fact restraining the development of a revolutionary situation. So far the party has issued vague calls for its supporters to spoil their ballots in the referendum. The KKE has polled around 5 percent support – in a hotly contested vote such as this one the spoiling of so many ballots from class-conscious workers can give a dangerous boost to the “yes” side that urges the Greek masses to accept blackmail.

This is in line with the Communist Party’s sectarian conception of revolutionary strategy, which offers united struggle only on the condition that others first accept its leadership and program. In practice, this has meant that at critical moments of struggle (including this referendum) they have stood apart from the larger movement against austerity rather than contending for leadership from within it. They offer biting criticism of SYRIZA on the basis that workers will come to them once they have learned the hard way.

Imagine, however, if the KKE followed the Leninist strategy of demonstrating through its own practice and principled unity the insufficiency of the reformists. If the party had offered critical support to SYRIZA in parliament, which is two seats short of being able to form a majority on its own, it would have gained a central platform to build a revolutionary pole of attraction. When Tsipras was preparing to offer massive concessions to the Troika, the KKE would have been able to act as the spokesperson for millions of Greek workers by threatening to bring down the government if austerity was agreed to.

The present political and economic crisis, manifested in the referendum, presents an unprecedented opportunity for revolutionary forces in Greece. A victory for “no” will expand these opportunities. An approach that stresses unity in the mass struggle, tactical flexibility, and a principled commitment to revolutionary change has time and again proven to be a winning formula for workers and the oppressed.


Posted in GreeceComments Off on Crisis and opportunity as EU-Greece standoff comes to a head

Take down the Confederate flag-Why Bree is a hero

Image result for Confederate flag

Bree Newsome being arrested, June 27.

Bree Newsome being arrested, June 27.

By now if you have been paying even the slightest bit of attention to social media, you have heard of Bree Newsome, a 30-year-old African American woman who scaled the flagpole on the South Carolina capitol grounds on June 27 and took down the Confederate flag. A statement she emailed to the press around the time she went up the pole reads: “We removed the flag today because we can’t wait any longer. We can’t continue like this another day…It’s time for a new chapter where we are sincere about dismantling white supremacy and building toward true racial justice and equality.”

From the top of the pole she called out “You come against me in the name of hatred, repression, and violence. I come against you in the name of God. This flag comes down today.” As she descended the pole, she told Capitol police that she was prepared to be arrested. Newsome and James Tyson, who provided support from the ground, were both arrested and booked with “defacing a monument.”  The charge is a misdemeanor, punishable by a fine or a maximum jail time of three years. Each was released on $3,000 bond.

This incredibly courageous and bold action has caught the attention of millions, as #FreeBree and #KeepItDown trend on Twitter. Meanwhile, donations have poured in for her bail and defense.

Confederate flag a symbol of racism and oppression

While politicians in South Caroline prepare to debate whether or not to take down the flag, Newsome and other activists took matters into their own hands. Scaling the flagpole in a harness, Bree Newsome showed strength and determination in the struggle not only to take down a symbol of racism, but to dismantle white supremacy itself.

All progressive people should salute Bree Newsome today and inspired by her example, rededicate ourselves to smashing racism and, building a truly just society.

Posted in USAComments Off on Take down the Confederate flag-Why Bree is a hero

Folks Fighting Serial Corruption in the Legal System


by jimcraven10

Image result for US COURT PHOTO

The National Liberty Alliance – The largest organized effort fighting legal corruption

I’ve been following the progress of John Darash and the organization he founded, The National Liberty Alliance, for a few years as they work to bring ‘reform’ to our corrupt legal system. Over those years Darash has attracted ten’s of thousands of loyal supporters and people dedicated to the cause and willing to put their heart and soul in working to bring “truth and honor” back to a system that is as far from truthful and honorable as day is from night.

Darash believes, and he cites legal authority in support of his beliefs, that the only way to hold judges and lawyers to the laws that they swear to uphold is by establishing “Common Law Grand Juries.” These CLGJ’s have the duty to “investigate” and then “indict” those judges and lawyers who are found to be law-breakers based upon the results of their investigation. Said another way… citizens are assembled to oversee the behavior of judges and lawyers. And I AGREE 100% with this citizen oversight idea! Clearly the “self-regulation” that characterizes our present “legal system” has destroyed public confidence in our system of justice. The distrust brought about by the outright criminal activity occurring in our courts is moving all those who learn of the crimes being committed IN OUR COURTS to either join Darash or take personal action to expose and fight to restore the lost trust. The latter is my approach as well as efforts by Anne Block (reporter for the Goldbarreporter.orgJohn Scannell (candidate for WA State Supreme Court) … not to mention all those who tried earlier in time but were viciously retaliated against by the legal enterprise … like, Doug Schafer, and Bob Grundstein to name a couple.

John Darash is no joke, he is playing in the major league ballpark… through these CLGJ’s, based in their investigations ‘formal’ (as opposed to what is accepted as ‘legal’) processes have been issued – such as WRITS and INDICTMENTS. For the most part these processes have been symbolic as none of those to whom these WRITS or INDICTMENTS are directed consider them valid. BUT do they have political power?…. I believe they do and of course John Darash claims absolutely these processes are having a positive effect. John says,

Recently we collected and spent $16,000 to fax seven mandamuses [over one million pages] to “ALL” US Supreme Court Justices, Federal Judges, State Judges, Sheriffs, US Marshals, FBI Special Agents, Joint Chief of Staff, US Congress, US Senate, 50 State Senates, 50 State Assemblies and 50 Governors.

You can download pdf copies at We also filed embossed sealed copies via U.S. Mail in all 94 Federal District Courts with powerful resultsWe have filed two Writ Habeas Corpuses that successfully released two People from jail.

Presently we are in the process of filing over 100 Writ Habeas Corpuses; Presentments a/k/a indictments against four federal judges, two US Attorneys, one FBI Agent and one clerk; re-filing Presentments against 8 top New York judges.

We are also planning to file numerous other court documents that we cannot talk about at this time. In order to file these papers we also need to fax all these papers to all of the aforementioned servants.

In my mind, any positive result in moving a corrupted system back to a respected branch of government is a success. And Darash proves that such success can be accomplished in the power that a well organized effort can accomplish. But organizations and what these organizations do requires a lot of money to execute on their strategic plan. John Darash has recently emailed his supporters asking for their help cover the costs in moving his efforts forward. He writes,

Since we started faxing we have been searching for a more affordable plan for faxing. Recently we found a company selling mass faxing software with 16 phone-line ports @ $440.00; 16 port (modems) hardware @ $2400.00 and 16 phone lines @ about $30/month each x 3 month; totaling $4280.00 plus approx. $800 for envelopes, paper, toner and stamps to file each document in all 94 district courts for a total cost of about $5000.00. This plan will allow us to send unlimited faxes for three months; and “ONLY” $480, for unlimited faxing, for each additional month after the next three months.

We must finish what we started; we cannot letup on the pressure we are building in the federal courts. Therefore we need $5000 ASAP to continue with our mission to save our Republic. Please donate over this Independence Day weekend. To donate by, credit card, check or money orders go to >

While I am not a member of the NLA, I admire all that John Darash has accomplished – both in organizing and executing a plan to address our failed judicial system. He is one of my present-day heroes who I celebrate this Independence Day.

Well done John… and God speed!

– See more at:

Posted in USAComments Off on Folks Fighting Serial Corruption in the Legal System

The Fourth of July and the right of revolution


Every schoolchild in the United States is exposed at one point or another to this famous passage from the Declaration of Independence: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” It is often cited, especially around Independence Day celebrations, as proof of the United States’ supposed moral infallibility and noble commitment to democratic ideals.

But for the vast majority of people who were alive for the drafting of this founding document, this was hollow rhetoric. Women were treated as the property of their husbands and fathers and had almost no civil or political rights. Even many white males were denied access to formal political channels due to property requirements for suffrage, and poor farmers were largely left out of the post-independence redistribution of loyalist landholdings.

The emptiness of this proclamation, principally authored by Thomas Jefferson, a slaveowner and one of the new country’s most prominent racist ideologues, was particularly apparent to the nearly 20 percent of the population who were enslaved and the Indigenous peoples who saw no relief from genocidal colonial expansion.

At the same time, the bulk of the victorious colonist army was certainly not made up of wealthy merchants and parasitic slaveholders. Those from the ruling strata of society who led it—like George Washington—did so as part of the officer class with all the attendant material comforts. What motivated members of the oppressed classes to join and ultimately win the War of Independence?

It certainly was not as if pre-independence U.S. history was a picture of national unity; class struggle was waged throughout the colonies. New York and New Jersey were home to a series of revolts waged by tenant farmers against their landlords. A similar movement of poor farmers, called the Regulator Movement, challenged the landed gentry in North Carolina. Heroic uprisings carried out by the enslaved shook the slavocracy to its core.

But still, circumstances allowed for the formation of a cross-class alliance to challenge British rule. The political leadership of the independence movement came from the merchants and slaveholders, who resented taxes imposed by London and a prohibition on colonization past the Appalachians. The upper classes were politically alienated by the monarchy when it began dispersing institutions of local government and concentrating more and more power in the hands of direct representatives of King George III.

Although many enslaved Blacks understandably sympathized with the British, who promised freedom in return for loyalty to the crown, rather than join a war effort led by one of the largest slaveholders in the colonies, lower class whites and free Blacks were largely supportive of the struggle for independence. They suffered the most from rising prices associated with the infamous Stamp Act and residents of port cities, often home to the most militant patriots, faced the threat of impressment—being kidnapped and forced to join the British Navy.

The English monarchy was seen as a symbol of the opulence of the hated upper classes, and support for independence was used as an opportunity to attack the arrogant notion of divine right—that the rule of a wealthy minority headed by a royal family was the natural, God-given order of society.

What was the ideological basis for the unity of the pro-independence social alliance? Everyone involved recognized the right of revolution. Waging a war for total separation from the British Empire required a radical rupture with the old politics of unquestioning fealty promoted by the monarchy.

While the Declaration of Independence was full of hypocrisy, it also contained this very progressive passage, “[W]henever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends [life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness], it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government. … [W]hen a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government.”

The right of revolution today

This notion, that in the face of oppression revolution was both a right and a duty, broke with all existing political traditions and recognized that the masses of people were the true makers of history. From the perspective of the landed gentry and rising merchant class, this was a very dangerous idea, but to achieve their aim of independence the new ruling class of the United States had no choice but to recognize it.

For the hundreds of thousands of participants who threw themselves into the war effort in one capacity or another, the right of revolution was no academic concept. The fighters for independence were able to open up a political space to challenge all forms of injustice by militarily defeating those who they had been told represented their divinely ordained superiors.

After independence was secured from the British, the masses of people wasted no time in using this space to organize against their new oppressors. Deeply indebted small farmers in western Massachusetts carried out a major armed uprising, which came to be known as Shays’ Rebellion, against an impending wave of foreclosures. A mass abolitionist movement in the North, complementing the ongoing insurrectionary activity carried out by slaves in the South, came into being in part on the ideological foundation of the right of revolution.

This tradition persists throughout U.S. history to the present day. Whenever it became apparent that a particular form of oppression was rooted in the political and economic structure of society itself, mass movements could connect to a proud radical legacy rooted in the right of revolution. The labor, LGBT, immigrants’ rights, and women’s and Black liberation struggles are just a few examples of people’s movements that at certain points turned to revolutionary politics to combat a system that aimed to “reduce them under absolute despotism.”

The right of revolution is not just an abstract political concept; it is a law of history. Lasting progress is not the result of compromise or the apolitical pursuit of utopian ideals. Real change can come about when the ruling elements of society outlive their ability to contribute to humanity and are confronted by those who maintain the rulers’ absurd and opulent existence with their sweat and blood.

This contradiction has taken many forms, leading to gains in some places and retreats in others. As the oppressed begin to understand their role in history, the struggle becomes more and more intense as the oppressors desperately try to prolong their rule over society. Ultimately, this conflict is resolved in a revolution, the decisive moment when the future conquers the past and a new era of human history begins.

Time for a new revolution

There can be little doubt that the bankers and CEOs who hold power in society today constitute just such an outmoded and reactionary force that can only be displaced through revolution. They create nothing of value but control all of society’s wealth. They organize production solely to maximize profits, guaranteeing that enormous swaths of humanity live in poverty and that periodic economic crises will leave more and more people destitute. They deny a decent education to a huge layer of society, holding back innovation and stifling the vast creative potential of humanity.

To maintain their grip on society, the capitalists spread racism, sexism, homophobia and all other forms of bigotry imaginable to divide us and prevent us from realizing our strength. The police carry out campaigns of racist terror against communities of color and attempt to repress any attempts to challenge the status quo.

But in spite of this horrifying oppression, the future, in an objective sense, belongs to us. Their system continues to function solely by virtue of our labor. Once the poor and working people of the world become aware of this fact and organize on that basis, the system of exploitation that underscores every other injustice can be eliminated.

As one particularly visionary participant in Shays’ Rebellion put it, “The great men are going to get all we have and I think it is time for us to rise and put a stop to it, and have no more courts, nor sheriffs, nor [tax] collectors.”

These words ring just as true today as they did more than 200 years ago. But to get there, we have to exercise the right of revolution.

Posted in USAComments Off on The Fourth of July and the right of revolution






Al-Zabadaani:  Thursday afternoon, the Syrian Air Force, receiving accurate Intel from MI about a constellation of targets just east of Al-Zabadaani, took to the air, fully loaded with ordnance,  and struck the rats of Alqaeda/Nusra at the Eastern Mountains delivering a raging inferno of Hell-fire which melted the pelts off the crawling vermin and shattered the bones around their quivering marrow.   In the course of the airstrikes, 2 warehouses storing boxes of ammunition were demolished by Syrian AF rockets while other guided missiles found their way to 2 factories for the manufacture of Zionist-designed rockets.  A 23mm cannon was also destroyed as it fired ineffectively on our bombers while 4 pickups with 23mm cannons were also destroyed, acting as open, blazing coffins for the screaming sewer denizens whose numbers killed exceeded 30, based on aerial assessment.  Vans could be seen ferrying the dead and dying to Zionist animal hospitals along tracks used normally by mountain goats, many vehicles falling to the wayside and tumbling where our bombers could target them for additional practice.

Zibdeen:  The SAA foiled an attempted infiltration by lying in wait for a convoy of vans and pickups.  Once pickup went up in flames after it was struck dead on by a Kornet rocket.  5 Jordanteezians were killed, but, I don’t have their names.  26 carcasses were counted on the ground by MI assessment units.

“Abu Yaasser Al-Ghootaani” (Id pending. Nusra rat leader)

Wissaam Muhammad Hassan Al-Daaghir

Haytham  Idrees

‘Awda Saami ‘Abduh

‘Ali Rajab Sa’eed

The rest were all foreigners.

Qalamoon:  Ahraar Al-Shaam, on June 28, 2015, reportedly killed an ISIS commander by the name of ‘Aamer Ghazaala, a/k/a  “Abu’Amr Al-Homsi”.  May all of them burn in the eternal flames of Hell.


NAZI proposal to expel Palestinians from homeland permanently



NAZI Eli Ben-Dahan

NAZI deputy defence minister has proposed a law that, if passed, will see the expulsion of Palestinian resistance members and their families permanently from Palestine.

According to Hebrew media reports, NAZI Eli Ben-Dahan believes that expelling members of the resistance groups and their immediate family members and exiling them abroad permanently will contribute to “rooting out the phenomenon of emerging saboteurs unaffiliated with any terrorist organisation committing attacks against Israeli targets.” The politician confirmed that he has asked NAZI Minister of Justice Ayelet Shaked to consider the proposal and get official approval for it to become law.

A policy of forced expulsion, if adopted by the NAZI authorities, would be a blatant violation of international humanitarian law, which prohibits the expulsion of any citizen or group of people from their own territory, either within the same territory or abroad. In addition, Article 147 of the Fourth Geneva Convention, regarding the protection of civilians during a time of war, makes it a grave breach of the Convention to deport or transfer a protected person.

Posted in Palestine Affairs, ZIO-NAZIComments Off on NAZI proposal to expel Palestinians from homeland permanently

Ulterior motives behind sanctions on Iran: Ayatollah Khamenei



Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei says the sanctions against Iran have nothing to do with the country’s nuclear activities or human rights record, adding that there are other motives behind the bans.

Addressing a group of university professors and researchers on Saturday night, Ayatollah Khamenei said those who have imposed sanctions on Iran are themselves the ones who foster terrorism and commit human rights violations.

The Leader said the sanctions against Iran have been imposed because the Islamic Republic has emerged as a nation, a movement and an identity guided by principles against the hegemonic system.

“Their objective is to prevent Iran from reaching a prominent civilizational status,” Ayatollah Khamenei said.

The Leader also highlighted the special role of professors in educating a generation of self-reliable, confident and diligent youths who will further move Iran toward progress.

Posted in USA, Europe, IranComments Off on Ulterior motives behind sanctions on Iran: Ayatollah Khamenei

Shoah’s pages