Publicly funded poseurs: The tax-funded cast of the "reality" TV program Dallas SWAT, who -- unlike other television performers -- have official permission to shoot some of their co-stars.
They really didn't have to wreck the house, but they did it anyway.
There was no tactical advantage to be gained by perforating the house with tear gas grenades (one of which remained, for a long time, embedded in an attic vent), blowing out five windows, leaving part of the ceiling collapsed and the whole house uninhabitable because of the suffocating residue left by the gas attack.
As the residents of the home on South Oak Cliff drive in Dallas insisted, the murder suspect sought by the SWAT team -- 18-year-old Cristobal Jaimes -- wasn't there. As Cristobal's father Francisco pointed out to the local ABC affiliate, the family cooperated fully with the SWAT team, consenting to a search of the home and staying out of the way.
For their part, the SWAT operators followed established procedures. This meant that, despite being clad in body armor, carrying high-performance weapons, and dramatically outnumbering their quarry, the officers proceeded at a glacial pace. For more than a half hour, they ran remote cameras into several rooms of the house and otherwise took care to avoid a direct confrontation with an individual they believed to be armed and potentially dangerous.
It was only after they had established, to something approximating a moral certainty, that Cristobal wasn't in the home, that the SWAT team began the tear gas fusillade. When that failed to flush out the suspect, the officers gathered their gear and drove away, leaving the Jaimes family with a devastated and uninhabitable home and without a word of apology.
Aftermath: Cristobal Jaimes' mother examines a bedroom left wrecked by the SWAT assault on their home. The persistent odor of tear gas made most of the house uninhabitable.
As far as the Dallas PD was concerned, the department had no moral or ethical responsibility to repair the damage done to an innocent family's home. That is -- cue voice of chastened reverence -- Official Policy. Accordingly, the SWAT team, after thrashing the Jaimes' home, simply gave the family the equivalent of a High School bully's distracted shrug and left in search of the nearest donut emporium.
Between January 1, 2007 and late June of this year, when the raid took place on the Jaimes' residence, "ten other property owners filed similar claims against the city for SWAT damage," reported WFAA-TV. "But Dallas has never paid a dime for the kicked in doors and other property damage. It likely won't go back and pay it now, either."
However, in a minuscule concession to public outrage provoked by media coverage of the Jaimes raid, "SWAT officers will at least let victims like the Jaimes know where to turn for help to decontaminate after [a] tear gas [assault]. It's a small gesture no other department in the state has done. In fact, DPD said it only found two other departments in the nation with similar programs"-- one in Detroit, the other in Las Vegas.
So if your house is needlessly trashed in a SWAT raid, it's all but certain that the people responsible for leaving your abode a smoking, choking ruin won't even condescend to tell you the name of a local company that can clean up the mess.
The Dallas Police, seeking to contain the PR damage, referred the Jaimes to a local non-profit called Victim Relief, which offered to clean up the house at its expense. The group's founder, an apparently decent man named Gene Grounds, tried to depict the Police Department's actions in the best possible light: "We understand that [the police] have a job and their job ends when they complete their assignment," he observed.
The "assignment" here, recall, was to arrest 18-year-old murder suspect Cristobal Jaimes. One would expect this to be a matter of some urgency, given that a SWAT team was dispatched to take him into custody.
But oddly enough, within a few days of the assault on the Jaimes residence, the police blew an opportunity to arrest Jaimes without violence: When the young man called 911 in an attempt to turn himself in, he was told by the operator that he would have to arrange for his own transportation. "[T]ake a car, bus whatever ... but [the police] won't come and pick you up," the operator told a no doubt puzzled and frustrated murder suspect, who reacted by calling 911 again, getting a second operator, and eventually arranging for his own arrest.*
So ... arresting this murder suspect wasn't a sufficiently high priority to warrant the dispatch of a regular black-and-white, but at the same time it was urgent enough to justify a paramilitary assault on the home of his innocent family?
Behind that contradiction lurks another important question: What effort, if any, was made to find and arrest Cristobal through conventional police methods? I suspect the answers would run the spectrum from "very little" to "none at all."
For decades prior to the introduction of the militarized police units called SWAT teams forty years ago, street officers and detectives routinely tracked down and arrested dangerous murder suspects, and I'm sure that this is still done today, at least in some jurisdictions. But now that practically every community is occupied by a federally subsidized SWAT outfit, it has become common to use those teams for routine missions -- not just arresting potentially violent suspects, but serving warrants and other non-crisis situations.
In the case of the Dallas SWAT team, the apparently irresistible temptation for the promiscuous use of SWAT teams is exacerbated by the distorting influence of "reality" television. The Dallas SWAT team, after all, isn't just a law enforcement agency. Its members are also television stars in search of the proper setting in which to display themselves.
In physics, the phrase "Observer Effect" refers to the way in which the act of observing something changes the behavior of the object under observation. A similar phenomenon can be found in the entertainment genre called "reality" television. No intelligent person can believe that human interactions caught on a less-than-candid camera are spontaneous and unaffected.
The worst and most troubling version of "reality" television programs are those chronicling the experiences of law enforcement agencies -- the decades-old Fox program "COPS" and its imitators, one of which is Dallas SWAT (which has engendered its own regional spin-offs, as well).
Police work is carried out by armed people invested with the power to commit discretionary lethal violence; it's a monumentally bad idea to appeal to the vanity of such people and to encourage them to act in ways calculated to enhance their image.
"Reality" programs involving police tend to emphasize photogeneity over professionalism, not only in terms of the personnel chosen to represent a given department but also in terms of the decisions made in a given situation. Chases and confrontations make for dramatic television; patient de-escalation does not.
Perhaps this is why Dallas SWAT -- which lost one of its cast members when he was found consorting with a groupie who turned out to be a prostitute -- seems to favor high-publicity operations of exceptionally dubious merit, such as raiding underground poker games.
Yes, these armored paladins of public order are bold as Achilles when storming a card game -- but timid as church mice when surrounding the home of a teenager believed to be armed and dangerous. That contrast, I think, throws into sharp relief the priorities of a law enforcement body that is also -- or perhaps primarily -- a propaganda instrument.
A legitimate documentary featuring the work of genuine peace officers would yield little of the adrenalized melodrama peddled by Fox and its imitators. Showing the routine arrest of Cristobal Jaimes on the streets, or his booking after the young man turned himself in, wouldn't play on the Idiot Box. Showing him being dragged out of a house by an amped-up SWAT team, on the other hand, is Good Television.
What we might call the "COPS Effect" is intimately related to the mindset I call the "Showtime Syndrome, which manifests itself whenever a police officer threatens, or indulges in, unnecessary violence. But this lethal mimicry isn't limited to law enforcement.
Private sector thugs watch the same "reality" programs, after all, and it's becoming increasingly common for criminals to stage home invasion robberies while disguised as SWAT operators or other police personnel carrying out armed raids.
In fact, Dallas police just recently broke up an urban gang that specialized in home invasion robberies of that kind. For more than two years, that gang rampaged across several counties, stealing enough to branch out into the nightclub business and real estate ventures (including mortgage fraud -- of the unofficial variety, that is). The crooks often posed as SWAT operators; on a few occasions, following the Bush Regime's lead, they used "enhanced interrogation techniques" such as waterboarding to break down the resistance of victims trying to conceal the location of cash and other valuables.
They took their cues from the police (left to right): Davin Stephens, Courtney Farmer, Earnest Ross, William Autrey.
Home invasions of that variety work best when they're carried out without resort to gunplay, which can attract the attention of neighbors and passersby. This leads me to wonder if some of those robberies could be thwarted if people weren't indoctrinated to see armed assaults as an increasingly routine form of police work. Again, we see evidence of the distorting influence of the "COPS Effect" at work.
Commentator Charles Featherstone describes COPS and its offspring as "the perfect morality tale for the evolving American police state.... It's 30 minutes – minus commercials – of moral superiority and vicarious entertainment at the expense of people who won't amount to much anyway."
That "morality play" is lethal, as it cultivates within the viewer a sense of identification with armed agents of State power and a sense of distance from the unsavory criminal suspects on the receiving end of State-sanctioned violence.
Officer Friendly, he ain't: The face of contemporary law enforcement, as depicted in the A&E series Dallas SWAT. Does this really look like something we'd expect to see in a genuinely free society?
"The watcher of COPS gets to marvel at the stupidity of everyone detained, the pettiness of their crimes, and more importantly – the fact that we are watching, which means we aren't being apprehended ourselves," continues Featherstone. "In fact, we're quite convinced we're not the kind of people who would ever wind up on the wrong side of a loaded police officer, and can laugh and shake our heads at the pathetic folks who are."
Of course, police work is hardly the incessantly dangerous occupation depicted on television. And thanks in some considerable measure to the attitudes cultivated by Police State Television, the odds are improving that each of us, no matter how hard we try to avoid it, will find ourselves on the "wrong side of a loaded police officer" at some time in our lives.
*A few years ago, a 911 dispatcher in Watuga -- a suburb of Ft. Worth -- reacted to an anguished mother's call describing a destructive tantrum by a 12-year-old child by sneering: "OK -- do you want us to come over and shoot her?" I don't think the intent here was to underscore to the mother that all police interactions involve the implicit threat of lethal violence.
On sale now!
Dum spiro, pugno!
I am sick of cop shows--both the reality ones and the dramas. T.V. is infested with them.
Even Animal Planet is not immune. It is filled with reality shows about "Animal cops".
TV is nothing but establishment
psychodrama designed to intimidate
in more ways than one.
The days of Andy Griffith and
Barney Fyffe are long gone.
We are what we are taught to be
and the state teaches but one
"Where the Spirit of the Lord is,
there is liberty." -Paul of Tarsus
Jerri Lynn Ward is spot on. Just how many police state cop shows are on the tube? Too many that's for sure. It seems that two out of every three shows involves some kind of law enforcement theme. It's the angelic agents of the state suppressing those deranged and unruly hoi polloi who are constantly conspiring against the benevolent state.
This reminds me why I cancelled my cable service and pulled the plug on my tv set. I couldn't even watch cable news without having to see Hannity's blank face or some skewed report favoring government intervention of some kind or another on FAUX, CNN or MSNBC.
It sickens me.
oh man...that is so wrong. this is not cool.
notice no affluent neighborhoods in the intros. the affluent can get lawyers.
A very good point you mentioned: they are part of the brainwashed American society too, which means they are cowards. If a Bush or Obama were to go hot with martial law now, as in the john warner defense authorization act and other police state measures, they'd have to get soldiers, maybe even foreign soldiers to do so.
to perfect that last picture wiht the LEO on it...it needs a swastika, a red, black, and white theme, and some german caption on it. do that, and you'd think you were looking at [neo] nazi sci-fi.
"As long as the police insist on acting like an army of occupation, their subjects will insist on playing their roles in return. Vive La Resistance!" - William Burroughs (1992)
Welcome to Mega-City One. "I Am the Law."
Jerri Lynn Ward wrote: "I am sick of cop shows--both the reality ones and the dramas. T.V. is infested with them.
Even Animal Planet is not immune. It is filled with reality shows about "Animal cops"."
Even more disturbing: cop shows are appearing on the MILITARY channel as well.
What we are seeing today started with Dirty Harry and other gotta get the bad guy at ANY cost dramas...the more recent judicial shows play their part as well in the indoctrination...great lawyers and all-knowing judges don't ya know.
If nothing else, POLICE STATE 101 plays very well in the land of the sheep, home of the slave.
I agree with the "cowards" comment above. During the Rodney King riots, it was the city police that abandoned the city.
It was retaken only by soldiers, after the rioters wore themselves out.
The "police" are the Standing Army that our forefathers warned us to never tolerate.
The men and women infesting many of our modern police forces are nothing more than a variation on the classic schoolyard bully. They function on ego and adrenalin and need ever increasing doses of both to continue operating. How do you deal with a schoolyard bully? You walk right up to him and pop him hard enough to ensure he never forgets.
Same principle applies here. When a decent percentage of these ego junkies understand that there is a good chance that such activity will result in them not making it home tonight to their battered wives and emotionally scarred children, their enthusiasm for terrorizing the populace will wane.
As a Jewess in the US, I just want to remind everyone that America wasn't won with a registered gun. And that criminals on EITHER side of the law are stopped by FIREARMS, not by talk. That is why all REAL Americans put our 2nd Amendment FIRST!
Jerri Lynn, Animal Planet is one of the most transparent of all NWO conditioning exercises; the channel preaches to children sacred animal rights and the iron fist of state authority.
Are we seeing the Stockholm syndrome
on a national scale?
I have been saying for a long time how the show COPS goes a long way towards desensitizing people to the police state, thus normalizing the criminalization of almost everything. It certainly glorifies the thuggish mentality of police officers, giving people all of the wrong motives to become a cop. I have always said, as a general proverb, people who WANT to become a cop are more than likely psychologically UNFIT to become one. We would do better with a lottery system.
Furthermore, concerning Dallas SWAT: I managed to watch that show a few times (somebody has to monitor enemy transmissions), and I remember feeling like I would be shocked--SHOCKED!--if one of the Dallas SWAT members wasn't on the "juice."
For some reason, I don't think Dallas SWAT will be taking down all of the steroid dealers in the area. Perhaps they might take down their dealer's competition as a payoff.
Good grief people! The problem is, as I see, you simply watch too much TV... Period!
Turn the damn thing off!
The sad result is what I have encountered with my coworkers in the DC area. One in particular brags about the number of people mugged, beaten, and shot by criminals in his neighborhood regularly.
So I asked him what is he going to do when it is his turn to get mugged. He told me he will gladly give them his stuff in the hopes they only send him to the hospital...I said he should fight back. Worst case scenario he gets beaten or killed. Same as if he did not fight back. Best case scenario he defends his personal freedom from those who would take it.
He rolled his eyes at me and said the cops will protect him and take care of him. So I informed him the cops are there to do two things and two things only and neither of which is to protect him.
1. Enforce rules that make you act like a sheep and do whatever they want you to do and 2. To fine you for everything under the sun so the money that actually makes it to your pocket after taxes can be taken by the state. Obviously I was a "radical" and person to stay away from because I did not go along with the crowd. It felt as if my coworkers actually moved away from me after I said this.
Besides desensitizing the public to the police state, the COPS genre is a form of social control, a pre-emptive propaganda. See what the cops can do to you if you don't shuck and jive to their tune.
Moreoever, the victims of the cops are the underclass: people of color, the poor, drunks, druggies, and other "undesireables." They are "not the type of peope we want in OUR neighborhoods. This allows viewers to gauge his and her privilege and moral superiority over the denizens of the ghetto who "choose" not to live by our principles and and don't subscribe to our middle class mores.
When was the last time you saw a COPS bully wrestle a guy in a Brooks Brothers suit to the floor,kick in a door in Beverly Hills, or slam a woman driving a Mercedes into the hood of her car.
I thought not!
Like many, I noticed this trend some time ago. There's always a purpose behind airing these shows, beyond merely providing the circus entertainment aspect of "bread and circuses."
Instilling fear and subservience into the masses is the primary motivation for Leviathan allowing the showcasing of it's agents in action. The "entertainment" value, on the other hand of course, is the primary motivation for Hollyweird-sanctioned production companies, but it's a fabulous byproduct for Leviathan as well.
Police work is carried out by armed people invested with the power to commit discretionary lethal violence; it's a monumentally bad idea to appeal to the vanity of such people and to encourage them to act in ways calculated to enhance their image.
Indeed. The effect of (not "reality") actuality television showcasing any group of people as "celebs," has a predictable outcome. If the masses practically worship Hollyweird celebs, they'll tend to do the same with Leviathan's own self-styled "celebs." The difference, of course, is that the Hollyweird variety is merely acting while actuality is the real deal.
This obviously means any one of us could at some point involuntarily "co-star" as the hapless "bad guy" in a Leviathan-orchestrated "circus" production, like COPS, Speeders, or "Most----"
Sounds great doesn't it? Sigh....
"notice no affluent neighborhoods in the intros. the affluent can get lawyers."
"Moreoever, the victims of the cops are the underclass: people of color, the poor, drunks, druggies, and other "undesireables." They are "not the type of peope we want in OUR neighborhoods."
Both of these are emotion filled tripe. You know why there aren't affluent neighborhoods in these shows? Because dramatic crime is occurring so much less in affluent areas. The shows will go to where they will have something to show instead of showing police getting raccoons out of trash containers or some kids TP'd a house. Geez, are you that ignorant?
The "undesireables" have no excuse for committing crimes yet in those neighborhoods we have high crime. They will get the attention that massive crime rates bring. What is a better use of police resources, patrolling a low crime rate area or high crime area?
And really, do you want drunks, druggies, and criminals in YOUR neighborhood? Did you you even think before posting?
Quite a difference.
i think you missed the point of marley's comment (i made the same observation). there will always be those who cause problems among us, but the point he made, and i made was this: crime is in all neighborhoods, how come the cops focused on those poor neighborhoods? Do you ever here of the ATF going into Compton, or Watts? no, they pick on those who are more likely to provide the least resistance, will not get media sympathy, or they can legally bankrupt. as for the SWAT team, they seem to be going after folks that the public will say, "aw shucks...they had it comin" or even worse, "who's gonna stick up for them--poor folks?"
i would agree that violent crime is more likely to be carried out by those who are lazy--those that stay at home all day and steal what you earn. however, as the bank failures are indicating, millions and billions have been lost or stolen by the same group of people who live in the "nicer parts of town." you can't have it both ways--raid the guy for 5 grams of crack, but leave the multimillion dollar thief alone. now i'm not endorsing raids of any kind since they are mostly unnecessary. however, it seems that this SWAT team has knowingly or unknowingly (i think knowingly) gone after bluegill instead of gone after sharks.
after all, "who cares about poor people?"
and lastly, and this is what i find sickening: this SWAT team, in order to have "something to film" has to pick someone every show who they are going to raid. i mean, they will have to go through all of their warrants and say, "let's raid this guy." i wish i could watch the show just to see how many hostage situations there are in Dallas. cuz to me, if there if no loss of life at stake for an occupant in the house, a raid is largely unnecessary. raid a house because someone may flush something down a toilet? "we might face armed resistance!" well, if you bust into anyone's house that's likely.
it reminds me of WACO: the ATF could have picked up david koresh at any time when he was in town, but they chose not to because it wanted to do something spectacular--a raid.....which was unnecessary.
lastly, whatever practice you condone today, can be used against you tomorrow. after all, you said it was ok. and this is why we need to protect the rights of the "undesirables" because sooner or later, that statute that was meant for the "undesirables", will have new ink added to it and it may well be that you fall into the newly amended category.
I am tracking with you. My point is that crime is very prevalent and concentrated in certain neighborhoods and it is much more cost effective to have police presence there.
White collar crime and crime the ATF seems to like to attack since it is benign, is a different animal. Less violent and much more difficult to prosecute as it takes a lot of digging to get proof.
ATF could have 1000 arrests a day by going into high crime areas and if they did their job correctly but they have some agenda and cherry pick their cases.
I in no way condone SWAT being used in most of the cases they are shown as it is overkill (no pun intended). In fact, I think cities rely too much on SWAT as their way of risk management. I do wonder what percentage of calls that SWAT is called out do they even fire their weapon?
What I do object to is attempting to excuse criminal behavior and saying they are picking on the "underclass". That "underclass" crime is generally more violent and destructive and requires a different type of enforcement.
Even so, both should be held accountable for their actions including destruction of property, injuries, or deaths.
white collar crimes usually involve higher paid lawyers and cops don't like it when lawyers do to them what they, the cops, do to the poor and minorities in general.
By way of introduction the global movement which the readers of this blog are called to relate more constructively to is most closely aligned with Mexican Zapatistan, who believe in autonomous community liberty from both oppressive state control AND corporate influence. Basically power to the human scale community, direct democracy primarily in action and slow deliberate non-hierarchical decision making, and not simply through voting.
On a more personal note probably I believe in more of an important place for private property (the right wing libertarian insight) in appropriate balance with collective sovereignty over common assets (the left wing libertarian insight) than other Zapatista influeneced acticists do, although I cannot speak for others, and am not sure about their exact position on this.
Basically I believe in a new balance (and not a romantic reversion to previous forms which were also inadequate and based on bourgious / racist colonialism) that will allow direct democratic decison making for the local people over their shared geogrpahic area, so taking the political power wieleding agenda away from the top down facist corporate / big state system, by peacefully challenging state control nation/western worldwide so as to eventually vest executive power at the bottom (decentralised, and non sectarian) in at least one modern secular western state and from there, hopefuly others) while still guaranteeing the individual liberty of private property through a lightly regulating and (this is essential) a fully accountable centre.
To expand on this last point which is key: once the principles of local human scale sovereignty become more established there will need to be some kind of delegate and representative constitutional channel set up (tpwards a new, directly democratic political structure built from below, not top down fiat) so eventually the new grassroots 'executive' can fully oversee the administrative structure above (and prevent it becoming imperial which - the law of accumulating power being as it is - will always be the case if the people of the below are not vigilant and (egain, this bit is essential) fully empowered by an appropriate non-oppressive political structure ie the ultimate 'check and balance'. This is still to be created (but to quote Oscar about the Bionic Man, we have the technology!)
what is happening down there in the peoples republik of kotexas those ruff n' tuff john wayne jackoff fantasy heroes in wannabe SS uniforms should protect us from evul hairy muslims with stinky feet. Too bad those swat bitchboys didn't have their uniforms designed by Hugo Boss like the nazis then they could look cool man, radical.
Everyone should be warned about these medicines.
Only a person with a healthy and strong heart should watch.
Please pass this link on.
This was an amazingly good read, and you've a very crisp and concise writer...glad I stumbled across this, thank you for existing.
Mr. Boland, that you so much for your exceptionally generous comment!
That's the best you can come up with for a gentleman like Mr. Grigg? Too much time watching TV, huh? Well, I suppose you spend too much time with your head deposited directly into your rectum. What a dolt.....
Free Man, I appreciate your kind thoughts about me, but I think MoT's advice was more of a general admonition, rather than a personalized rebuke. I'm grateful for MoT's plentiful and frequent contributions to this blog.
Duly noted, sir. I greatly appreciate your perspectives and commentary, and it really disturbs me to see someone summarily scorn concerns on an issue as big as this.
I met a chick cop this weekend who wanted me to know how proud her boss was about having been a part of the Texas Rangers' raid team at Waco, and how they should never should have released the FLDS kids (despite their complete and total police state tactics). Concerned about my own safety in the presence of an armed thug with a license to kill, I held my tongue. Just another coward, I suppose.....
My apology to MoT for the severity of my remark. I hope he's a friend, not a foe....
gfouts14: The "undesireables" have no excuse for committing crimes yet in those neighborhoods we have high crime. They will get the attention that massive crime rates bring. What is a better use of police resources, patrolling a low crime rate area or high crime area?
I don't know where you live but plenty of crime around here takes place in "good neighborhoods": drug dealing, fencing, for instance.
And, I'm not talking about low crime areas being patrolled heavily. I'm talking about how criminals in "better neighborhoods" where crime takes place as a rule are immune from getting beat up. People who drive nice cars and are drunk are immune from the bullies. People who are dressed nice don't normally get tasered.
gfouts15: And really, do you want drunks, druggies, and criminals in YOUR neighborhood? Did you you even think before posting?
They are, and they don't bother me a bit. I'd defend them against the cops any day. Who wants to live in a "gated community.? That's where the real criminals live.
Thanks anonymous for getting my point. It's sort of like bread and circuses for the middle class.
You commented: nd lastly, and this is what i find sickening: this SWAT team, in order to have "something to film" has to pick someone every show who they are going to raid.
I particularly hate the run-ups to the street walker raids. There's something about a bunch of grown men, "pretending" to be horny, getting hookers in their cars, driving around the corner, and, well...whatever they do next. They run in these pathetic women who bond out and are back on the street again, again and again. Don't they have rapists, robbers, and killes to hunt down?
"My apology to MoT for the severity of my remark. I hope he's a friend, not a foe...."
Whoa!... I've been gone a few days, not to spend too many waking hours on the "net", and I've been nuked!
NO... I wasm't writing to Will specifically. There were enough comments going back and forth from a lot of people.
The problem is that the pervasive cultural eye of Sauron, masked as TeeVee, is kowtowed to and ogled far too much. In restaurants, shopping venues, the DMV and even in the publick skrools for Gods sake!
The non-stop stacato of commercials and the mindless drivel that YOU pay for was simply too much. Think about it. Advertisers spend billions to indoctrinate you as to how its gonna be and then YOU pay for the privilege of being brainwashed.
People complain about these SWAT or COPS shows and how denigrating they are. They are indeed. I long ago saw a trend towards this sick voyeurism through "reality" TV.
On this same tangent just why does the Gubmint think that everyone HAS to have high def boob toobs? My own cynical self feels its all the better to use that bandwidth in order to program you for bigger and BADDER things yet to come.
Who knows what sub-carrier signal and at what frame rate messages are literally being beamed into your subconscious. "Obey. Don't resist" The list goes on.
In this cultural atmosphere you have to view the device, and those pulling the media levers, at the governments pleasure, as being fundamentally EVIL. Too much importance is placed on it and the messages it vomits at you.
And so... I now hit the sack. Can't think too clearly anymore due to fatigue.
Hit me sometime to talk about your views, I am Duane and black man and firearms instructor in VA, hit me back
Post a Comment