Why Is Police Violence Increasing Like Mad? How Does This Connect to Bill Windsor’s Lawless America?
Mary W Maxwell, RumormillNews.com, August 9, 2015.

American hero Bill Windsor is once again a political prisoner, in Idaho, for having tried to straighten out our legal mess-up. Please see my article “We Need More Bill Windsors, and Urgently,” at GumshoeNews.com (August 7, 2015)

In that article I included a two-minute video by Irene Holmes, whose kids had been snatched by the state. Gumshoe’s editor suggested that I use a more compelling video than the one by Irene Holmes (in which she sings to her baby).

I am indeed interested in telling the more gritty stories of violence that Bill Windsor has included in his Lawless America video series. To Irene, though, the loss of her children is biologically violent; and to them, the loss of their mom is almost certain to be permanently damaging.

I see the increasing police violence as “of a piece” with the judicial corruption that Bill has uncovered in the US. Just go to Youtube and search “Police violence,” you will be shocked. Commonly now a cop “takes someone down” which mean arresting them by throwing them on the ground.

It seems this is the policy of the police, as is, of course, the use of the Taser. Women, as well as men, get thrown to the ground. If the arrest occurs in your house, there too, you may be thrown to the floor! (Note: a friend of mine in Canada says she sees, almost once a week, homeless persons being “taken down” in the street.)

When this happens in America, a lawyer might suggest that the legal solution is to file a lawsuit under the amazingly generous civil-rights provisions found in codified federal law at 42 USC 1983. In other words, the individual was wronged and can bring a civil action, a type of tort.

There are two things wrong with that approach (though it’s much better than nothing). First, when compensation is awarded, it is the public that has to pay the bill. Huh?

Second, it is a personal solution for the plaintiff, but does not counteract the police policy. That is, the tort action itself does not oppose what is done in any case other than the individual’s case. (“I want my client to win money, period.”) What about the fact that the assault made on the person’s body is plainly a crime? Nobody goes there.

So let’s ask: why are police becoming more violent? I will give a ‘local’ answer first, and then give a Big Picture answer.

The local reason why a cop ventures past the proper cop-citizen interaction is that he is trained to do so. Naturally a cop carries out the instructions he is given. Today he is given a strong line about the badness of people. They are terrorists. They are child neglecters. They are…etc.

This is connected to the normal “labor union” approach of police forces, which is nudged along by, say, a Police Benevolent Association (meaning benevolent to any member). That is, they state loudly that all policepersons live under danger, and advocate measures of self-protection.

African-Americans say the reason drivers get killed during a car-pullover by police is that cops are taught that if the man at the wheel appears to reach for something in the glove compartment it may be a gun, intended for use against the cop. Therefore the cop should take pre-emptive action of self-defense. Bang, you’re dead, for speeding.
Clearly that is a matter of policy. You are responsible for it in your state.

The Big Picture

Put aside for now the proximate cause of police violence, as just described, and consider the ultimate cause. I’m pretty sure I’ve got this right, and I credit a book entitled “Hidden History” for my Eureka moment.

The gist of that book, by Gerry Docherty and Jim Macgregor, is that the Great War of 1914-1918, later known as World War I, was cooked up in the halls of Oxford by Lord This and Lord That, and foisted on the Parliament with amazing deceit. (Nothing like we were taught, that the assassination of the Archduke Ferdinand instigated the war.)

Has this anything to do with police brutality as such? No. It has to do with the fact that since at least 1913 (if not late 1700s), England was purportedly run by Parliament but was really run by men operating behind the scenes.

I now make the claim that this is the normal position of the human race. Powerful persons run the show and all the others more or less follow obediently. An important thing to notice is that cultures that say they have conquered this problem are probably not being accurate. They may say it sincerely but they are unaware of who is running the show.

I repeat: it is normal in human life for some persons to be controlled by others. The controlling may be subtle or be violent. The controlees generally capitulate and cooperate. And now I add: they often don’t realize they are doing so.

My America

I was born in 1947 and grew up in almost magical circumstances. By the time I was old enough to think, in the late Sixties, wonderful rulings were popping out of the Supreme Court all the time. They offered us the most nuanced legal protections. It did seem that law was a force that could act against the powerful.

Until quite recently I felt protected by the law. I failed to notice -- and here is where the Docherty/Macgregor book comes in – that the apparent rulers are not the real rulers. In England in 1913 the apparent rulers were the elected members of parliament. But the real rulers were hidden; they did not have a position of authority and were therefore not accountable to the public.

The hidden rulers did whatever they felt like doing, by bribery, persuasion, intimidation, etc. If a troublemaker needed to be removed he could be removed via a heart attack, a train wreck, a fall from a horse, or whatever. In this sense, the rulers were a mafia. They had hit men. But with most mafias, the people know who the mafioso are. In England, it was not apparent. Off went the boys to World War I. Millions died for “a cause” that the people believed in. Nobody even smelled a rat.

In my America it was definitely not apparent that a few men behind the scenes were running everything. We spoke of the two parties in Congress as each having an agenda that may win or be defeated – based on the tallying up of the vote. (Seriously!) In reality, though, some very clever masters were dictating to Congressional leaders, and to appointed officials.

Did they dictate to the Supreme Court? I now think so. But didn’t I claim above that this Court was handing out all sort of beautiful rulings in favor of the people? Well, yes, but that could mean that the Secret Rulers wanted this. They may have considered it a good tactic for folks to be mis-educated about law’s ability to protect!

I assume they also wanted us to be mis-educated about the so-called competitive spirit of the two main political parties. I sure fell for it hook, line, and sinker.

Looking back on it, I can see that the media and school textbooks were the main sources of our knowledge of ‘politics,’ and both those sources were probably under tight control.

A few years ago I read an intriguing comment that President Kennedy, during his first week in office, had to be introduced to his Cabinet. In other words he did not already know them; he did not pick them. (Allen Dulles, McGeorge Bundy, Robert McNamara, etc.) So then who does pick each president’s cabinet members? Presumably the men who really run things.

Actually, the “Bozos” who mis-educated me, by teaching me that the law works against the powerful, did themselves a bad turn. I can use my sociobiological toolkit in conjunction with my legal idealism and come up with something that is really threatening to the powerful.

That is, I really do understand that folks today are powerless against the new police brutality. I’ve got not the slightest illusion that “goodness will win out.” But I know how informed peeps can act in enlightened self-interest. We’re a social species and the society can prevail over the bullies.

Back to Mae Brussell

It’s pretty annoying to think that more than 40 years ago, Mae Brussell had collected the key information that we need today! Among the things she noticed were the personnel connections between Dallas ’63 and Watergate ’73, and between the use of mind-control at Vacaville prison and the Patty Hearst affair.

Mae also noted the influx of Nazi’s to the US in the 1950s and said to herself:

“When you think of Hitler, you think of prisons. And when I thought about the killing of Kennedy and all the Nazis involved, I realized that the prison system had to be directly related to it. That’s when I began to correspond with prisoners and get more information about prison deaths and mind-control experiments.”

In 1978, Paul Krassner writing “The Mind of Mae Brussell,” noted that a turning point in her research occurred when she attended the trial of Hugo Pinell, accused of killing a guard at Soledad prison:

“The whole trial was rigged. I was just outraged. It was then that I decided … to find the relationship between the corruption, political prisoners in this country, and the assassinations and conspiracies.”

Brussell saw patterns of murders identical to those in Germany (which she learned about from E Gumbrel’s 1922 book, Four Years of Political Murders, most of which were later admitted to by the Ministry of Justice!) Listen to her, quoted in Paul Krassner’s 1978 “The Mind of Mae Brussell” (online):

“How much violence was there in Nazi Germany, before the old Germany, the center of theater, opera, philosophy, poetry, psychology and medicine, was destroyed? How many incidents took place that were not coincidental? Was it WHEN THE FIRST TAILOR DISAPPEARED Or librarian? Or when the first press was closed OR THE FIRST SONG ELIMINATED? Or when the first political science teacher was killed coming home on his bike? How many incidents happened that were perfectly normal until people woke up and said “Hey, we’re in a police state!” [Emphasis added]

The Way Out

Go to Youtube and watch videos on Police Brutality in India. I can’t claim any understanding of Hindu culture and won’t attempt to figure out how the violence cold be reduced. But in the US we have big traditions of controlling the police. To the extent that we’ve let police get away with murder it was due to:

1. failure of peeps to find out about the violence and injustice,
2. our ignorance of the real chain of command, particularly our naďve belief that the legislature acts freely and cares for us,
3. our bafflement at how to deal with the current takeover by brazen liars and genocidal idiots.

One and Two on that list no longer register. It is only Three that we need to get stuck into. I think the over-50 set would know how to respond. They had better do something about teaching the younger ones. Yuri Bezmenov, who defected from the Soviet Union, gave Ed Griffin an interview in 1983. (See it on Youtube.) He said our enemies, as led by himself, went for our youngest.

Yuri says demoralization was the main goal. What young person do you know who has hopes and dreams? Most of them have been taught to “move on” when they are dissatisfied with the present. But move on to where? They are given a steady diet of junk on the screen and are not even taught the lessons of history. They can’t connect past and present. Like the field mouse whose nest Robert Burns accidentally overturned with his plow:

But, Mousie, thou art no thy lane
In proving foresight may be vain;
The best laid schemes o’ mice an’ men gang aft a-gley.
Still thou art blest compared wi’ me!
The present only toucheth thee:
But, oh! I backward cast my e’e
On prospects drear!
An’ forward, tho’ I canna see, I guess an’ fear!

Well, the mouse may be ‘blest’ by its intellectual limitations, but a child is not.

Here is the police brutality vid I mentioned. Don’t watch if you are likely to be traumatized.

Moral of the story: the new military style of police has got to go. The indiviodual policepersons are not the authors of this policy. You are.

See to it that you fix it up A.S.A.P.
Out the secret rulers while you still can.

-- Mary W Maxwell watches America from Australia. She can be reached at ProsecutionForTreason.com. She offers a link below to the 100th article she has published in the last 12 months (at Rumormill and GumshoeNews.com).