https://twausa.com/1984-surveillance-information-news-commentary-in-the-usa
1984/CCP Style Police State Tyranny, Rogue Police and Unaccountable Agents, Crimes, Corruption, Lying, Shootings, Murders, Maiming, Surveillance, Tracking, Civil Strife, Social Disorder VS Democracy, Fair Prosecution and Charges; Individuals’ Safety, Freedom and Liberty; Individuals’ Dignity and Respect; Order, Civic Virtues, Discipline, and Limited Government
08/31/2020 UPDATE FROM 06/15/2020
THE WAR: TAS, TAS PATS, AMERICANS’ TRUE ENEMY, THE TRIUMVIRATE – TRUMP&PENCE, XI JINPING&CHINA, PUTIN&RUSSIA – HAVE COME FROM HIDING UNDERGROUND TO VICIOUSLY RELAUNCH THE COLD WAR AND PRODUCE&POUR CHAOS UPON USA FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROMOTING THEIR WCCL AGENDAS AND TOTALITARIANISM/AUTHORITARIANISM.
CITIZENS CONTINUE TO FIND THEMSELVES TRAPPED BETWEEN LAWLESS RUFFIANS, CRIMINAL, MURDEROUS, DIRTY, CORRUPT, LYING, CHAOS PRODUCING POLITICIANS&THEIR FEW LAWLESS RUFFIAN, CRIMINAL, MURDEROUS, DIRTY, CORRUPT, LYING, CHAOS PRODUCING HENCHMEN&WOMEN HIDING IN POLICE UNIFORMS AND THE CRIMINALS WHO DAILY THREATEN THEIR LIVES AND PEACE.
SO, CITIZENS DON’T NEED TO DISBAND/REDUCE POLICE DEPARTMENTS/ BUT:
(1.) FIRST, THEY MUST RECOGNIZE THEIR TRUE ENEMIES ARE DELIBERATELY PRODUCING CHAOS FOR THE PURPOSE OF TEARING DOWN TAS, TAS PATS, AMERICANS – LAWLESS, CRIMINAL, MURDEROUS, DIRTY, CORRUPT, LYING, CHAOS PRODUCING, RUFFIANS AS POLITICIANS; AND LAWLESS, CRIMINAL, MURDEROUS, DIRTY, CORRUPT, LYING, CHAOS PRODUCING HENCHMEN&WOMEN HIDING IN POLICE UNIFORM
(2.) SECOND, THEY NEED TO ESTABLISH REFORMS&RESTORE DIGNITY&DISCIPLINE&INTEGRITY&CIVIC VIRTUES&RESPECT&RULES OF LAW WITHIN TAS’ (THE AMERICAN SYSTEM’S) POLITICAL ARENA&POLICE DEPARTMENTS
(3.) THIRD,THEY NEED TO RECOGNIZE WHILE TAS, TAS PATS, AMERICANS LOOK FOR POLITICIANS&POLICE TO HELP KEEP THEM SAFE& SOLVE REAL NATURALLY OCCURRING CRIME, LAWLESS, CRIMINAL, POLITICIANS&THEIR HENCHMEN&WOMEN HIDING IN POLICE UNIFORMS LIE, COMMIT MURDER&OTHER CRIMES, PERFORM CORRUPT ACTS, DO DIRTY DEEDS, TO DELIBERATELY CREATE CHAOS TO CRUSH/DESTROY TAS, TAS PATS, AMERICANS USA.
SO, TAS, TAS PATS, AMERICANS MUST REJECT/REFUSE TO TOLERATE SPECIOUS ARGUMENTS; CORRUPT ATTITUDES; AND PROPAGANDA&LIES OF THOSE WHO FAIL TO UPHOLD OR ARGUE AGAINST DISCIPLINEℴ JUST CHARGING&PROSECUTION; SENTENCING; REBUKE FOR VIOLATION OF CITIZENS’ STANDARDS OF DIGNITY, DISCIPLINE, INTEGRITY&CIVIC VIRTUES; AND RESPECT&RULES OF LAW WHICH ALLOWS FOR THE CONTINUING PRODUCTION&POURING OF CHAOS UPON TAS. TAS PATS, AMERICANS.
SO, TAS, TAS PATS, AMERICANS MUST RECOGNIZE TRUMP&PENCE, XI JINPING&CHINA, PUTIN&RUSSIA AS THE TRUE PRODUCERS OF POLITICAL&POLICE VIOLENCE&MURDERS&CHAOS BEING POURED UPON AMERICA’S CITIZENS IN ORDER TO ACHIEVE THEIR AGENDAS OF TOTALITARIANISM&AUTHORITARIANISM.
AS HAS BEEN STATED IN THIS WEBSITE’S BLOGS SINCE ITS BEGINNING, UNDER GOD’S/JESUS’ COMMAND&FAITH, ENDOWED&GIVEN, GIFTS&UNALIENABLE RIGHTS TO LIFE, LIBERTY, AND PURSUITS OF HAPPINESS, AMERICANS HAVE EVERYTHING THEY NEED TO CRUSH&DESTROY THE AGENDAS OF THE TRIUMVIRATE&CORRUPT HENCHMEN HIDING IN POLICE UNIFORMS AND TO MEET FRANKLIN’S RESPONSE AND CHALLENGE, “A REPUBLIC, IF YOU CAN KEEP IT.”. THEY JUST HAVE TO EXERCISE WITH UNDYING COMMITMENT THOSE COMMANDS&FAITH, GIFTS&UNALIENABLE RIGHTS TO ACHIEVE VICTORY.
06/15/2020
HOW WILL CITIZENS FIND PEACE&SECURITY&PROTECTION IF
AMERICAN CITIZENS ARE CAUGHT BETWEEN A FEW DIRTY, CORRUPT, MURDEROUS POLICE PERSONS, INEFFECTIVE POLICE CHIEFS, POLICE UNIONS WHO OUGHT TO STOP DEFENDING DIRTY COPS, PROSECUTORS WHO INEFFECTIVELY PROSECUTE DIRTY COPS, CORRUPT POLITICIANS, AND COMMON STREET TRUGS/CRIMINALS WHO BELONG IN JAIL RATHER THAN OUT PREYING UPON INNOCENT CITIZENS?
DE-FUNDING POLICE DEPARTMENTS IS A SILLY/CRAZY IDEA THAT WILL LEAVE PEOPLE WITHOUT PEACE/SECURITY/PROTECTION AND BEING TOO EASY ON CRIMINALS AND LETTING THEM OUT OF JAIL IS HARMFUL TO INNOCENT CITIZENS
“A REPUBLIC, IF YOU CAN KEEP IT.”.
Policing is a tough job which most of us would not go anywhere near but which needs to be done by someone. So, De-funding, reducing police departments, rioting, looting, stealing, arson, destruction of ones community and its property is not the answer to cop murders. But screening out dirty cops, stopping police unions from supporting dirty cops, giving all cops rigorous psychological screening tests to weed out dangerous/unstable characters, imposing strict discipline reviews on all suspected problem cops, making it easier to overrule union protections for dirty cops, requiring prosecutors to treat police crimes with fairness to all parties, strengthening civilian oversight boards over police and police departments. Those are just a few of many reforms and administrative processes that can be used to check, balance, and hold police authority accountable for wrongdoing and criminal conduct. But de-funding and reducing police departments raises alarm that police may not be available when needed for safety&protection&security in the community.
Citizens deserve to be protected against lawless ruffians in the community&lawless cops. But the citizen is caught between a few lawless, dangerous police persons who murder citizens without just cause and vicious criminals who are out preying on innocent Americans who are just trying to stay safe, protected, alive, and at peace in a cruel world. Americans have seen or heard of many, many vicious criminal cops murdering blacks without mercy or conscience – just look at the youtube video of South Carolina cop Michael Slager murdering, in cold blood Walter Scott, by shooting him in the back while he was running away; he then planted a gun beside him. He got what he deserved, a prison term. Just read about cop Shannon Kepler who murdered young Jeremy Lake, a black nineteen year old., for dating his daughter. And can anyone forget about the murder of Laquan McDonald by cop Jason Van Dyke. I believe most police persons are decent people who want to do the right thing. But there are a few dirty cops and police departments that need to be cleaned out so that the good cops and departments can get the honor&praise they deserve. So, cleaning up police departments and getting rid of dirty cops is the answer. De-funding the police departments is not since they are needed to protect&secure citizens peace and safety against vicious criminals preying upon the community.
This blogger is strictly against de-funding or reductions in police departments since there are so many dangerous criminals walking the streets, although strict administrative controls and limits on police abuse of authority, illegal tracking&spying, and other mischievous and illegal conduct must be effectively applied. This blogger truly believes that the problems in police departments are all capable of being addressed by administrators, regulations, oversight boards with real independent oversight authority, a reform of prosecutors decision making of whether to charge or not to charge, more community input into what they need from police and more concrete action on police complaints, and a reduction in unions protection of dirty cops. But de-funding and reduction of police departments in crime infested USA should not be considered.
08/23/2019
1984 STATE TYRANNY, POLICE STATE, TRACKERS, CRIMINALS, ABUSERS INFECT THIS WEBSITE’S COMPUTERS, STEALS PERSONAL DATA FROM HIS COMPUTER, INTERFERES WITH ITS BLOGGER’S WRITINGS, ROAMS AROUND IN HIS COMPUTERS, BLOCKS HIS WEBSITE, SPIES ON HIS COMPUTER DOINGS, AND CREATES ALL SORTS OF MISCHIEF
“A REPUBLIC, IF YOU CAN KEEP IT.”
The tyrants, criminals, minions of the official thugs, 1984 state tyrants and police state criminals are busy creating as much mischief and criminal conduct against this blogger as they can to frustrate, intimidate, control, surveil, and dump filth and garbage on this blogger and his websites as they can. They represent the type of filth and garbage of the 1984 police state tyrants which this blogger must stand up against and commit to expose with all his might. They are the type of human evil and human filth which in the mist of their murder, tyranny, slavery, racial abuse and murder, Jim Crow, political assassinations, and brutal suppression of America/Americans, Americans/America have, nevertheless, stood and fought against for over 243 years. You tyrants, evil doers, bottom trash feeders, human abusers and murders, suppressors and oppressors should receive no rest from this bloggers and Americans resistance and fight back!
So, attempts to interfere with this bloggers computers, shut down his computers, infect his computers, mess up his computers, spy on his goings in his computers, and steal his personal data, all of which you dirty, low down 1984 police state scoundrel and criminals have done, will, nevertheless, not stop this blogger from continuing to expose you, your crimes, your murders, your filth, your garbage to fight for Franklin’s response and challenge, “A republic, if you can keep it.”. in place of your brutal, murderous, criminal, traitorous, tyrannical 1984 police state surveillance and control! It’s our prayer you’ll go back to the hell from which you came.
08/20/2019
PANTALEO FIRED – POLICE ARE NECESSARY FOR ORDER, PROTECTION AND SAFETY, AND DEFENSE BUT THEY MUST BE STRICTLY DISCIPLINED, HELD TO ACCOUNT, AND PUNISHED BECAUSE OF THE LIFE & DEATH AUTHORITY THEY ARE GIVEN – SINCE PANTALEO’S BEHAVIOR WAS RULED RECKLESS HE GOT WHAT HE DESERVED
“A REPUBLIC, IF YOU CAN KEEP IT.”
Having been a military soldier for nine and a half years, I had many mandatory military training sessions on the Geneva Convention and its requirements on how to treat prisoners and civilians coming under the units control. We were informed of the humane, respectful, decent treatment we were required to render to such people who had come under soldiers’ control. Police officers encounter situations that are just as dangerous, bring suspects under control, and are trained on how to subdue, control, and treat such suspects. So, they are trained about what types of behavior are unacceptable. So, they should be disciplined when they act in violation of accepted standards and behavior and law just like anyone else even if the public is sympathetic to the difficult job they are given to perform.
The public can sympathize with professionals and authorities who have to make difficult life and death decisions, especially since most of the public would not want the job requiring them to make such decisions. But that sympathy should not extend to those professionals and authorities who abuse or recklessly use their right to make life and death decisions. Police like doctors, judges, soldiers perform roles which require them to make life and death decisions for the people they come into contact with. And unlike the doctor or judge who may often have long periods of time to deliberate and reflect upon their decisions on life and death for the people they deal with, police and soldiers more often have to make on the spot decisions requiring rapid thought and reaction. Unless they clearly act abusively, criminally, illegally, recklessly, or negligently, they deserve lots of sympathy.
What Eric Gardner did was and is quite commonly done on many streets in Chicago. In the early 2000s I was fired from my job. I worked other jobs in Chicago, got a peddlers license, and supplemented my income from those jobs by peddling goods in Chicago. In doing so, I frequently ran into people, whom I came to know quite well, who like Eric Gardner, stood or hung around certain places and sold loose cigarettes. Many of them became my customers buying from me goods I bought wholesale and which I resold to them and others like Eric Gardner. A few time, I was present selling my goods, when police pulled up and disbursed people engaged in illegally selling loose cigarettes like Eric Gardner. I knew of some of them who were arrested for selling cigarettes like Eric, kept in jail, and at trial were fined hundreds and hundred of dollars for that misdemeanor criminal offense. But, thankfully, I never heard of any of them being ruffed up and killed. And the few police orders to cease and disburse such activity that I witnessed went smoothly.
Sympathy should end where those professionals and authorities have acted abusively, illegally, criminally, recklessly, or negligently. And strict discipline and rules of law ought to be applied to them for abusive, illegal, criminal, reckless, and negligent behavior as it would be to any other citizen. For years I’ve followed the news about the Pantaleo case. I long ago concluded that he should have been fired and/or charged with at least negligent or reckless homicide and possibly voluntary or involuntary manslaughter. There is no good reason why Pantaleo did what he did. Eric Gardner was no threat to Pantaleo. Pantaleo should have properly arrested Gardner for engaging in a criminal misdemeanor offense, not recklessly kill him. Pantaleo was found to be at least reckless and got at the very least what he deserved – being fired.
07/28/2019
EXCELLENT REASONS WHY USE/CONDUCT/EMPLOYMENT OF SURVEILLANCE TECHNOLOGY BY POLICE/LAW ENFORCEMENT/GOVERNMENT AGENCIES NEED TO BE STRICTLY BANNED/REGULATED/MONITORED/ACCOUNTED FOR TO MAINTAIN CITIZENS’ FREEDOM AND PRIVACY AND TO PREVENT CITIZENS’ INJURIES AND HARMS FROM ITS ABUSE BY POLICE AND GOVERNMENT AUTHORIITIES OR OFFICIALS
“A REPUBLIC, IF YOU CAN KEEP IT.”
Although the article referred to is about facial recognition technology and its use by police and government authorities and officials, the basic concerns applies to all systems of surveillance used by police and government authorities or officials to spy on, surveil, monitor, track, secretly manipulate, or illegally pry into citizens lives and business and the need to ban, regulate, monitor, and otherwise ensure that police and government authorities and officials are properly using such technology in the performance of their duties.
The focus of this blog is on why surveillance technology when used/employed by police and government authorities or officials should be strictly banned/regulated/monitored/accounted for to maintain the freedoms and safety of the citizens against its abuse by police and government authorities or officials. The concern here is for people’s safety and welfare and privacy and the proper use of such technology while protecting the public against the potential harm and injury from police and government authorities and official misuse/misconduct/abuse/illegal criminal use of those powers to employ surveillance technology. The use of surveillance technology may be a useful tool, but like all tools its can be used for enormous good or catastrophic harm by those engaged in evil and abusive conduct.
And, therefore, the public cannot justifiably rely upon unverified trust without strict regulation to ensure police and government authorities or officials properly use it without causing harm and injury rather than good or benefit. So, this blog will restates some of the concerns discussed on nytimes.com, on 05/ /2019, in “San Francisco Bans Facial Recognition Technology”, by Kate Conger, Richard Fausset and Serge F. Kovaleski which express the alarm of this blogger and others with too much license given to those police and government authorities or officials to use surveillance technology so that they may engage in improper use/abuse/misconduct/criminal activity with such surveillance technology without the necessary strictly banned/regulated/monitored/accounting for its use/conduct to maintain the freedoms and safety and privacy of the citizens against its abuse and the resulting harm and injury to citizens from police and government authorities and officials.
So, some concerns expressed in that article which are shared by this blogger are restated or quoted below:
1.) “Aaron Peskin, the city supervisor who sponsored the bill, said that it sent a particularly strong message to the nation, coming from a city transformed by tech. “I think part of San Francisco being the real and perceived headquarters for all things tech also comes with a responsibility for its local legislators,” Mr. Peskin said. “We have an outsize responsibility to regulate the excesses of technology precisely because they are headquartered here.”
2.) “Matt Cagle, a lawyer with the A.C.L.U. of Northern California, on Tuesday summed up the broad concerns of facial recognition: The technology, he said, “provides government with unprecedented power to track people going about their daily lives. That’s incompatible with a healthy democracy.” The San Francisco proposal, he added, “is really forward-looking and looks to prevent the unleashing of this dangerous technology against the public.”
3.) “The ban prohibits city agencies from using facial recognition technology, or information gleaned from external systems that use the technology. It is part of a larger legislative package devised to govern the use of surveillance technologies in the city that requires local agencies to create policies controlling their use of these tools. There are some exemptions, including one that would give prosecutors a way out if the transparency requirements might interfere with their investigations.”
4.) “But there is a broader concern. “When you have the ability to track people in physical space, in effect everybody becomes subject to the surveillance of the government,” said Marc Rotenberg, the group’s executive director.”
5.) “Mr. Cagle and others said that a worst-case scenario already exists in China, where facial recognition is used to keep close tabs on the Uighurs, a largely Muslim minority, and is being integrated into a national digital panopticon system powered by roughly 200 million surveillance cameras.”
6.) “Daniel Castro, director of the Center for Data Innovation at the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation, is among those who opposed the idea of a ban. He said he would prefer to see face-recognition data accessible to the police only if they have secured a warrant from a judge, following guidelines the Supreme Court has set for other forms of electronic surveillance.”
7.) “But proponents of the bans say they are an effort to hit the pause button and study the matter before harm is done. The proposed ban in Somerville, the Boston suburb, was sponsored by a councilor, Ben Ewen-Campen. “The government and the public don’t have a handle on what the technology is and what it will become,” he said on Tuesday.”
8.) “Last year, Bradford L. Smith, the president of Microsoft, warned that the technology was too risky for companies to police on their own and asked Congress to oversee its use. American civil liberties advocates warn that the ability of facial surveillance to identify people at a distance, or online, without their knowledge or consent presents unique risks — threatening Americans’ ability to freely attend political protests or simply go about their business anonymously in public.”
9.) “Mr. Bedoya said that these images are tantamount to being in a perpetual police lineup, as law enforcement agencies use them to check against the faces of suspected criminals. He also said that comprehensive regulation of the technology is sorely lacking. “This is the most pervasive and risky surveillance technology of the 21st century,” he said.
10.) “The battle over the technology intensified last year after two researchers published a study showing bias in some of the most popular facial surveillance systems. Called Gender Shades, the study reported that systems from IBM and Microsoft were much better at identifying the gender of white men’s faces than they were at identifying the gender of darker-skinned or female faces. Warning that African-Americans, women and others could easily be incorrectly identified as suspects and wrongly arrested, the American Civil Liberties Union and other nonprofit groups last year called on Amazon to stop selling its technology to law enforcement.” The battle over the technology intensified last year after two researchers published a study showing bias in some of the most popular facial surveillance systems. Called Gender Shades, the study reported that systems from IBM and Microsoft were much better at identifying the gender of white men’s faces than they were at identifying the gender of darker-skinned or female faces.
So, there are serious abuses, misuses, inaccuracies from the use of facial recognition technology but also from all surveillance technologies. So, the public finds itself caught between criminals who need to be caught with the help of such technologies and police and government authorities and officials who can properly use such technology to fight crime but who can also abuse it, misuse it, and commit evils and harms and injuries to citizens from its use. Citizens and organizations like those in this article who’ll stand up and fight for the proper bans, regulations, controls, management, and accountability of surveillance systems are the best bet the save citizens from the abuses, misuse, evils of its improper use by police and government authorities and officials to prevent a 1984 Police State and the meet Franklin’s response and challenge, “A republic, if you can keep it.”.
06/29/2019
Yes, The Public Appreciates, Respects, and Honors Them, and All the Public Recognizes it Cannot Do Without Them, But Hold Them Accountable – No Blank Checks to Lawlessly Do As Anyone Damn Well Pleases
“A REPUBLIC, IF YOU CAN KEEP IT.”
While proclaiming appreciation for law enforcement agencies and personnel, it is not a contradiction to criticize or bring to justice failed law enforcement activities and personnel since the public recognizes the necessity of their services and commitment but wants it delivered with integrity and honor and accountability given the tremendous authority and power such law enforcement agencies and personnel have been granted over them. The public doesn’t want anyone to be given a blank check to do anything they damn well please without accountability.
Because, in spite of the horrific crimes, abuses, negligence, recklessness of SOME, A VERY FEW, let it be clearly stated that Americans retain a belief in the necessity and respect and appreciation of law enforcement institutions, agencies, departments, personnel, and the greater part of their activities since there is an absolute necessity for them and the services they perform.
All people recognize the valuable and irreplaceable services and commitment to law enforcement, justice, and security law enforcement personnel and agencies perform. Sometimes however, SOME, A VERY FEW, individuals, administrators, politicians, and leaders of those agencies make unwise decisions, implement unwise policies, commit crimes, engage in misconduct, intentionally or negligently or mistakenly serve the public, or otherwise create harms. Then there is a need for independent sources of authority, including the citizenry, to challenge and hold to account those SOME, A VERY FEW, who are engaged in such acts. Those independent sources of authority, including the citizenry, the courts, politicians, administrators, commissions, and other agencies need to challenge, to hold to account, to correct, to reform, to remove, and to replace those individuals, those, SOME, A VERY FEW, failing in their commitment and service.
That is what is meant by the expressions of appreciation, respect, and recognition of the necessity of law enforcement personnel and agencies, but with a desire that those, SOME, A VERY FEW, individuals and entities in those agencies and institutions be held to account for the intentional, negligent, reckless, misuse or abuse of the tremendous authority and powers they are granted to exercise over the public. The public certainly cannot do without their necessary services and commitment, but it wants them delivered with integrity and honor and accountability given the tremendous authority and power law enforcement personnel and institutions have been granted over them. The public doesn’t want anyone to be given a blank check to do anything they damn well please without accountability.
Commentator: The World and United States of America 