Author: historyresolved

Posted on

Police Code of Silence? NOT!

All you need to know:
The disproportionate amount of attention given to law enforcement officers; which is almost always negative, by the news media gives people the feeling that more is “at play” than there is. The media is not hesitant to bait others into saying or doing what they themselves wish, usually to the detriment of the baitee. If the persons can’t be baited, then the media will twist their words.

The media wants to portray the police in a way that falsely gives the impression that police selectively enforce the laws and gives more attention to a crime if the victim is white and less attention if a prostitute or homeless person is involved. Especially if the suspect is not white. This is ridiculous. Officers are predominantly law-abiding, civic-minded soccer moms or dads. Their goal is to be happy and to be happy with their family and friends. It is not going to work to be evil and cruel; someone completely the opposite of when at home. It’s the news media, the reporters, the writers, and especially the producers who have much more in common with crooks than law enforcement.

Details:
The current prejudice against police officers is glaring. Just look around at current events. If someone makes an allegation against an officer it is assumed true by the weight of this prejudice. All one has to do is make an allegation against the police and the media instantly picks it up and reports it as true. And if it can’t be proven true then it must be because the officers are hiding behind a “blue wall of silence.”

There is no vast understanding among all officers to lie to defend other officer’s actions. In today’s world, police officers are the first to turn in dishonesty by fellow officers. Police officers are usually building their careers, ones that would include promotions. If a carpenter is arrested for shoplifting it isn’t news, if a police officer is arrested it is news. Police bad conduct is disproportionately reported.

If a police officer is making an arrest for some crime it goes to reason that that person would be willing to lie if it could help themselves.

Years ago individual police officers began audio recording their activities. This was after the advent of small recording devices. The reason was that if someone made a complaint against the officer there was an audio account. Once played in front of the accuser the complaint was usually dropped. Of course, there is police misconduct, but it is being addressed very aggressively as it should be. Officers should be held to a higher standard, just not the standard of perfection. There will always be those that become officers for the sole reason to do crime.

The public’s attention is naturally drawn to officers and their actions. When the Rodney Glen King (police misconduct was recorded by a private person, see that incident) incident occurred I heard more than one TV news report suggest that “If this was recorded by chance how often do they really occur?” Nearly everyone has a camera now and nearly everything an officer does is recorded. Where is the avalanche of misconduct by police officers?

Keep in mind that when someone makes a complaint against an officer it is often because the officer has been called there to keep the peace, settle a dispute, arrest someone, and/or protect the prey against the predator. There is almost always someone that infuriated by the officers and thus a possible complaint. Many times the person being preyed upon is black as well as the suspect. There is much more black on black and black on white crime than white on black.

Today, most agencies have a very good ratio of black officers to white ones. I’ve heard many complaints that an agency has placed too many black officers in their predominantly white sections and too few in the predominantly black one. FACT, many black officers don’t want to work in black neighborhoods. Why? Because they are treated very harshly in black sections.

Trivia time, just for fun:
An off duty LAPD officer went to a little bar in a medium sized beach town on the coast of Southern California. While there it became know to some drunk college types that he was a police officer. He judiciously left the bar. He was followed by five men who confronted him and threatened to beat him. (P.S. all involved were white) Knowing he was about to be beaten, he drew his weapon and warned the men. Being drunk, they ignored it. He fired a round into the parking lot pavement. Being drunk men continued toward him until he shot one of them.

The incident was investigated by the local police. The man who was shot died. The other men claimed that the officer shot without a warning and without provocation. The officer was arrested. LAPD Internal Affairs began an investigation. The norm in cases like this is for the police department to wait until the criminal complaint is adjudicated before starting their Trial Board. It was taking a long time for the criminal trial to begin; nearly a year. All-the-while, the officer was being held in jail because he couldn’t come up with the bail.

By law, LAPD has only one year to adjudicate their civil case and since that date was approaching they convened a Trial Board. The officer is allowed to have another officer to act as his representative during the board. That officer visited the scene in the beach town to search for the slug that should be in the parking lot’s pavement. The town’s homicide detectives searched and couldn’t find it and the LAPD Trial Board Advocate should have searched for it. Eventually, he found it. He called the local police to pry it out of the pavement so it could be compared to the officer’s gun, which was being held as evidence by them.

Ballistics proved that it was the warning shot fired by the officer, just as he claimed. When confronted with this finding the other men crumbled and admitted that they were lying. All criminal charges were dropped along with LAPD’s charges.

In recent times the best way to get ahead in a police department is to “burn” another officer. This is especially true in large agencies. It is because of this, and their discrimination against police officers that they didn’t find the evidence.

In another instance:
A woman was getting lewd phone calls, lots of them. She complained and a wiretap was placed on her phone. This was back in the day wiretaps were done. The phone number was traced to an LAPD officer that lived not far from her. He was arrested for the misdemeanor and the LAPD convened a civil Trial Board. His defense rep (an LAPD officer of his choice to serve as a pseudo attorney) was frustrated because it was an open and shut case, yet, the officer kept claiming his innocence. As time dragged on his wife divorced him.

During the trial board, the LAPD called the phone tech that did the phone trace. He confirmed that he did the trace and it was accurate. When it was the defense’s turn his rep ask the tech if he did a phone trace and was it traced to; and then he read the officer’s phone number. The tech replied no. He took out his notes and read off the number the trace was to. The trace was to a number similar to the officer’s but where the last two digits were transposed. No one had noticed this before. The officer was presumed guilty. Wrongly, he had been arrested, lost his family, and nearly lost his job over this prejudice and careless mistake by an advocate who wanted to help his career by burning a cop. As it turned out, the correct number belonged to a known sex offender.

Okay, just one more, even more serious:
At the outcome of the Rodney King incident, the sergeant in charge was arrested for assault with a deadly weapon and other add on charges. Stacy Koon, the sergeant, after serving most of his two-year sentence, was transferred to a halfway house. A normal procedure when releasing a felon back into the public. The transfer was published by local media. A black man armed himself and went to that house. Koon was not there. Not able to find Koon the man opened fire on two completely innocent white people killing them.

The modern media fans these inaccurate flames of hate. Any black person can attack an officer (white or black) and claim reverse racism. Many deadly attacks on police have been blamed on perceived racism. In Baltimore MD, when a black arrestee died in the back of a police van it was claimed to be because of racism by the officers. Yet, the arresting officer was black. The transporting officer was black. The police commissioner was black. The mayor was black. But the media allowed the thread of racism to mingle with the facts. And rap music stars, don’t get me started. NWA (_igge_ With an Attitude, today we can’t even mention their name) Tupac, Little Biggie, Snoope Dogg all admit they got their start by selling drugs to their neighborhood children and others. But if they claimed they were harassed and preyed upon by the police because they were black, not for being drug dealers. Even if the officers were black.

Posted on

Crash of Boeing 737 in Africa (Another) Update

Airplane

Just In: Okay, now we know what really happened.

RE: 737 Max 8 MCAS causes two airliners to crash.

France’s Airbus added new more efficient and powerful engines on their Airbus planes. Boeing didn’t want to be left behind so they did too. HOWEVER, the new engines were physically much larger, taller, than those already installed. Airbus had no problems, the engines easily fit under the wings. The Airbus planes set much higher off the ground than the 737s. So, Boeing mounted the engines farther forward and up, closer to the underside of the wing. But this changed the balance of the planes. Under acceleration, the planes would tend to rotate nose up (instead of up and straight ahead). This was compensated by using a software program (MCAS) to correct the nose up by inputting nose down trim. All this was supposed to be done without the pilot noticing, thus, no extra training and no extra expense would be needed.

It’s inconceivable that Boeing would only use one sensor for this, but that’s just what they did. Nearly every critical system has a backup. Even small private airplanes have TWO sparkplugs and TWO ignitions systems for EACH cylinder. Boeing offered a backup system but, offered as an option at additional costs to the buyer. This will come back to bite Boeing in the butt.

During hard acceleration, as when taking off, and when the single AOA (Angle Of Attack) failed, either by a bird strike or otherwise, the software kept trying to trim the plane nose down even though the pilots were trying to nose up, to climb. This confused the pilots. They didn’t know why the plane was trying to do the opposite of what they were trying to do. The nose down trim was stronger than the pilot’s physical strength, which was trying to nose up. The pilots would be taken by surprise and not have the time needed to sort out the problem before the plane struck the ground. In the U.S. pilots receive a lot of time flying in real planes, not just simulators, thus, out of instinct they would know how to turn off the software and override the trim using the manual trim control. Many foreign airlines didn’t have, or wouldn’t spend, the money to send their pilots overseas for training in real planes. It is costly.

In fairness, in 2008, twice in September and once in October, Qantas Airline (A330 Airbuses) had flights that suddenly nosed down. Each time they were approaching Australia from the ocean and near the coast. However, each occurrence had sufficient altitude for the pilots to recover. Several people sustained serious injuries. After exhaustive investigations the investigators discovered which erroneous command was sent to the plane’s main computer, but, they never learned why. The code would run thousands of times correctly and then send an erroneous command. Eventually, the plane’s software was changed so that when this illogical command was sent, the computer was to ignore it.

Original Post:
Just in case you didn’t see this, the crash in Africa was only partially the fault of Boeing.

Boeing’s MCAS stall-protection system was at fault in the crash of an Ethiopian Airlines Boeing 737 MAX 8 on March 10, 2019, this, according to a preliminary report released early Thursday. An earlier report showed that the aircraft’s flight data recorder revealed that the crew initially followed procedures Boeing recommended to disable the system, but then inexplicably re-enabled it. (We understand now that they were using trial and error to try to correct the aircraft. They ran out of time.)

A friend of Boeing brought up the specter of training again. It is noted that there have been no crashes in the U.S.A. or other counties that have a reputation for doing good training that include much flight time in planes, not just simulators.

Of course, that can’t be a final answer. If I’m traveling and get on a plane in Africa I would expect that every possible circumstance is covered during training. The pilots of the doomed planes obviously had much-advanced training and to a level much higher than the ordinary general aviation pilots. In this age of advanced artificial intelligence, AI, it’s incumbent upon Boeing to be sure that the difficulty level of flying their planes should fall significantly below that.

Okay, a bit of trivia: When Airbus was first rolling out their new A320, it had the worlds most advanced avionics. They had their most experienced test pilot ferry the airplane to an air show elsewhere in France. It had several persons on board that were guests and traveling to the show. In route, there was a little airshow at a small airport, and Airbus asked the pilot to do a low-level flyby to wow the locals by the sight of the humongous plane. The plane had several guests on it who were traveling to the big airshow. The pilot flew by at a very low altitude. At the end of the runway, the A320 kept flying straight and level and into the forest and trees, it crashed. Two persons onboard the plane died but the others, including the pilots, survived. The pilot stated that when he attempted to increase speed and altitude, the advanced AI on the airplane refused to allow him to do so. Airbus could not have been more embarrassed.

But, just so you know, this wasn’t the last problem dealing with AI (artificial intelligence) that Airbus had–and is having–some exactly like these. It seems Boeing is bent on repeating Airbus’s sins. It is still true that humans make and will make mistakes far more often than computers, but, on this topic, we have to strive for and accept nothing less than perfect.

Posted on

U-2 Spy Over-Flights Of USSR

What you need to know: CIA pilot Frances Gary Powers was doing a top secret (spying) over-flight of the USSR in a top secret U-2 spy plane when he claimed to be shot down. He failed to follow any of the standing orders if shot down. He failed to push the destruct aircraft switch to keep the top-secret aircraft and just as valuable its top secret camera system from falling into USSR hands, and he failed to take the poison given him. Despite the claim that he was shot down, the top-secret aircraft was whole except for minor damage. He suffered even less damage. All this was after crashing from over 70,000 feet. The USSR did not have the ability to shoot down an aircraft at that altitude. He was a double agent for the USSR.

The Details: In the 1960s USA President Dwight D. Eisenhower needed to see what the Soviet Union’s military threat really was. He was frightened that they had the capability to do what they boasted of. Lockheed Aircraft was able to produce an aircraft that could overfly the USSR. It couldn’t fly high enough to evade radar but too high to be shot down, and that was good enough. The USSR would never publicly acknowledge that the USA could overfly their country and they could not stop it.

The U-2 can fly well over 70,000, feet AGL (above ground level) and the USSR had nothing that could fly that high, neither missiles nor planes, thus, they had to sit quietly and not say anything. They were unable to demand the USA to stop without having to admit to the rest of the world that they were not able to stop us.

Then came a mission flown by then CIA officer Francis Gary Powers on 1 May 1960. He was overdue. To the horror of the CIA and the president, the USSR announced that it had shot down a U-2, flight. There, on television, for the world to see was Powers, in remarkably good health for having been shot down and ejected from a disintegrated airplane. Well not quite. It seems that the aircraft didn’t disintegrate and was, in fact, in remarkably good condition. Nearly completely intact. Despite the plane freefalling for about 70,000, feet it crashed with no “crush” damage (caused by a falling plane hitting the ground at a high rate of speed) and nearly no other damage. And we had the images to prove this, on Soviet TV. The Soviets got a nearly intact airplane. The Soviets got a top-secret plane and top-secret photo and imaging equipment. Powers failed to initiate the self-destruct mechanism on the plane as he was ordered to do. Powers also failed to use the poison he was given to kill himself (yes, it’s true, these things do happen) before being captured. Powers stated that he didn’t use the poison because, “…had hopes of escaping from the USSR.” Yeah, an American deep inside the USSR would be able to make it a thousand miles without being captured.

I remember this incident very clearly. The fact is, our CIA was certain that Powers was a USSR spy even if they couldn’t admit it. One of Power’s stories was that he had some kind of engine troubles that caused him to lose enough altitude to allow the Soviet missiles to reach him. Then another one where he said the missile reached his altitude but just nicked the plane which then fell like a leaf over 70,000, feet to land with no “crush” damage, as would be expected. However, his injuries along with the damage done to the fallen U-2 plane did not ring true. The Soviets were broadcasting images of the pilot and plane that showed little damage. But, what could the CIA do? The USA would have to expose valuable intelligence assets to try to disprove the shoot down.

About five years later Powers was released back to the USA in a spy swap. He was not welcomed home as a hero. He was not treated the same as our shot down pilots of the Vietnam war. Nope, he returned and was not offered any position anywhere. Not with the CIA or any government vendor. His considerable abilities were not desired anywhere. Not by an airline or even by flying tours. He got the only job he could, and that was with the sympathetic news media. He became a helicopter pilot for a Southern CA news station.

Eventually, he met the same fate that all persons seem to meet when the Soviet Union is fearful that some embarrassing information might be made public. For instance, as in a bestselling book or autobiography. His chopper fell from the sky and he was killed. He ran out of fuel because “someone” had worked on the fuel gauge without telling him.

Of course, there are several cover stories manufactured by the media over time. Often they do more harm (for Powers) than good. For example, when Powers was debriefed by the CIA upon his return he proudly told them that he gave the USSR some misinformation. He told them that he U-2 could not fly over 68,000 feet while it can fly well above that. But, didn’t the Soviets see that he was flying at a higher altitude. This was a tacit admittance that he was not flying at the altitude he was supposed to. And then there is the one where the Soviets had an unarmed Su-9 fighter in the area and he was instructed to ram the U-2. (During WWII both British and Nazi pilots ramed planes when necessary) As the story goes, the Su-9 missed the U-2 because he was flying too fast to maneuver to the U-2. Really. Please note that the Su-9 can only fly to 55,000, feet altitude. Powers must have been well below where he was supposed to be.

Posted on

Atlanta Child Murders: The investigation

All you need to know:
Around 1979, several black persons, mostly children, were murdered in and around the vicinity of Atlant GA. The leaders of the black community were sure the incidents were racially motivated by whites and publicly pressured and prevented the police from investigating black suspects. The suspect turned out to be a gay black man. There was no racism on the part of the police, only the public: which was fueled by the news media.

Details: I just saw a teaser for a program on the ID Investigation
Discovery channel where the topic is the Atlanta Child Murders which occurred back in the 1979-80 years. The teaser has someone who sounds as if he is a black person saying, “… they were like throwaway kids.” The obvious inference is that law enforcement didn’t give the murders a high priority because the victims were blacks.

Nothing could be further from the truth. I distinctly remember this era. At the time, the unsolved murders were portrayed as being racial by black leaders and the media. The police were pressured to investigate only white people.

In one instance a white person stopped in a black neighborhood because he wanted to hire some day laborers. A mob of black persons formed and began pelting him with rocks. In another one, a heating boiler in a black school blew up and killed four children. A black woman is filmed by the news media saying, “Boilers in white schools don’t blow up.” There was a constant banter of black on white racism.

When the police finally got a lead on the killer they had to investigate him in secret because he was a popular black man who happened to be gay. Police wasted valuable time and resources surveilling two white men (admittedly racist) even after four murders occurred while they were under this surveillance and having passing polygraphs. The police were harassed if they dared to suspect and investigate a black person. Many more people had to die before the police would have enough evidence to overwhelm public opinion and be able to investigate the correct criminal who was a black man, and thus, be able to fully investigate the crimes unfettered. The criminal was caught red-handed tossing a body in a river. The crimes weren’t racial, they were sexual in nature.

The criminal’s name is Wayne Williams. There have been several subsequent testing of DNA in attempts to prove Williams is not the suspect but all of them pointed back to Williams. The DNA tests were only 99.9% conclusive to him. There was not enough high-grade DNA, whole DNA to get the desired one in a billion results, but, this is enough evidence for 99.9 % of the population. But never enough for the racist. who desperately want to exonerate the black man and indicate a white person.

Why can’t we point out black on white prejudice? White on black prejudice is headline news in print and on the air reports. Even though it seems most of these very public reports turn out to be setups, hoaxes. The black on white racist can’t seem to find legitimate, earnest examples to try to embellish the myth that white on black prejudice is rampant. It exists, it’s just not as rampant as enemies of the USA wish, thus, they have to lie. This example cost BLACK persons their lives.

Posted on

Jussie Smollett

When did this story start to smell like two-day-old fish???? It was when the perpetrators yelled (in Chicago) “This is MAGA country.” Huh. Where in Chicago is MAGA country? What street? What tiny little section? If the perpetrators yelled this, they would have been attacked and beaten before getting a block away.

What’s the real reason for the kid glove treatment of Jussie? Because it is black vs. white racism. Nearly all involved are black people, and they want to slap whites in the face by trivializing this. How will this keep America great: Trading one sin for another. Republicans fought the Civil War to make all equal. Liberals, Democrats want to cover up their slave history by making blacks slaves all over again; to government programs. This time by giving them superior rights and making Republicans pay.

It’s pandering to get votes. Then they put into place programs that hurt the black community. This flood of hate has to stop.

BTW: When was America great? When we stopped the NAZIs and communist from taking over the world, all the while stopping Japan’s invasion of Asia; it is called WWII.

Posted on

Fire & Ice, Oil & Water: Just like Conservatives and liberals (They Won’t Mix)

All you need to know:
Liberals are not “Progressives,” President Theodore Roosevelt was a Progressive; not really Republican nor Democrat. Liberals are a 180, from him. They have soiled their liberal reputation as many of their machinations come to light and as such, they seek a new identity: One with honor. Conservatives won’t let go of their belief in Christ and/or their Christian values of right and wrong. LIberals refuse to say what is right or wrong. Liberal won’t be satisfied until Christians not only ACCEPT them, which they already do but also APPROVE of their behavior. Christians can’t, it is in their Bible (1 Timothy 1:10, Leviticus 18:22, and many more). It seems every other religion is allowed to believe in their “bible,” but Christians aren’t.

Details: Conservatives keep asking “…why can’t we all just get along.” Liberals never ask this. They make no effort to find common ground with Conservatives. It seems Conservatives are too simple-minded to recognize this fact and keep understating liberal’s goals. Here is one rule that one can always use: If it hurts or hinders humans then Liberals are for it. Think about it: abortion, plastic bags, salt, large soda drinks, and on and on. Often positions whose sole purpose is to offend Conservatives, like neutral gender public bathrooms. Does it really do any harm to require people to use the bathroom that the sex they were born in dictates; emotional or otherwise? LIberals want, demand, senseless things that cause endless annoyance to common sense and yet either makes little difference in the scheme of things or addresses life and death issues on the side of death–abortions. Liberals are only liberal when it comes to gambling, drugs, sex, and other vices (the more promiscuous the better). But not when it benefits humans such as new dams, drilling for oil, new roads, new buildings, and/or more convenient shopping (strip malls).  

But, the reason we can’t all get along is that conservatives have a litmus test just as do liberals. Conservatives, whether they are Christians or not, accept and acknowledge that Christians can practice their faith unfettered. The liberal party has absorbed the gay community to the extent that they encourage gay behavior. The gay community is comprised of many rich members who donate to their causes (read Democrats) freely. All the substantial Christian churches and/or organizations have openly said they accept the gay community just as they are. But the gay community demands APPROVAL from Christians. Bible-believing Christians can’t approve the gay lifestyle because it is forbidden, many times, in the Bible. The gay community sees organizations that freely teach that the gay lifestyle is wrong, even sinful, as a threat.

Conservatives tend to be more the law and order types; liberals are the opposite. Conservatives acknowledge what is right and what is wrong. Liberals will not. I’ve seen numerous liberal politicians who while being interviewed refuse to say what is right or wrong. Just one example: When the MO. governor called the rioters, who were setting cars and business on fire (after they looted the business) in Ferguson Mo. thugs, he was forced by high ranking Democrats, to publicly apologize to the thugs; and he did this on every interview afterward. I distinctly remember a reporter trying to get him to say the rioting, the theft, and the arson were wrong, but he wouldn’t. Conservative reporters had no problem calling the rioters thugs, and much more. Here is a testament as to whether Conservatives are more law and order types; I’ve been in many courtrooms where a defendant is on trial for a crime and the defendant–99.9% of the time– clean up and try to appear clean-cut and as Conservative as possible. I’ve never seen a Conservative or for that matter even a liberal defendant, who was on trial dress down to appear as a Liberal. You get the picture, unkempt.

Posted on

Again: No Evidence of Evolution In Recent Scientific Discovery

Stick men
Image by ElisaRiva from Pixabay

Fox News reported that paleontologists have discovered fossils of 130 million years old insects. Here is a quote from the report: It also “proves through direct fossil evidence how some morphological traits related to hatching and linked behaviors, at least in insect embryos, have been subject to a high degree of evolutionary conservatism,” according to the study’s abstract. What’s evolutionary conservatism? They are saying that it’s evolution has been conservative. That is, has not happened “much.” This discovery is contrary to evolution.

The Greenland shark: A huge sluggish shark: one of the largest at 21 feet and 2,100lbs and suspected to be able to live up to 300 years. Does not reach sexual maturity until 150 years old. No evidence of evolutions despite being on Earth for @300 million years.

Turtles: No evidence of evolution for millions of years. Really? The current turtle is the best “model” that evolution could come up with? One has to lay hundreds of eggs just so one or two can make it to maturity and, thus, reproduce?

Alligators: No evidence of evolution for millions of years.

Humans: Hit the evolutions jackpot in that they evolved in an improbable, dubious, and impossible short time period.

The alternative? God? So much more, so little time. More to come.

Posted on

McCain Hero or Pseudo-Hero?

Only a Democrat would disagree with the premise that John McCain spent much of his Senate years undermining the conservative values that his party, Republican, stood for or at least tried to stand for. He was sent to the Senate to fill Barry Goldwater’s shoes, not Nancy Pelosi’s. Goldwater was extremely conservative. It was because of members like McCain that Republicans often– usually–failed. McCain was given a pass because he was a war hero. Americans blindly accept any malfeasants if committed by a “hero.” Does America know that mafia “made-men” also served in WW-II? And some even got medals for their heroism? When these crooks returned to the USA should they have been given a pass on the extortion, loan sharking, bookmaking and more, that they committed upon this return?

Today we learn that the McCain organization actively worked behind the scenes to undermine the democratic principles of the country he served in. He was complicit in the scheme by traitors to overturn the will of the people by defaming President Trump in the hope of impeaching him. FoxNews and a court filing reveal that that contrary to McCain’s perjurious statements, he was sending his agents all over the world to collect information concerning the infamous Steele Dossier and then he provided it surreptitiously to news outlets to be “leaked” to the public. A dossier that all who were involved with it knew was not true. He practiced very poor morals at the least.

Does someone who works contrary to his constituent’s desires and the reasons they sent him to Washington. And then he lies about it, and pays those agents (spies by any other name) to bring down the Party he was supposed to be strengthening. Should he be called a hero? He wore one face publicly while behind the scenes he was the opposite. e

McCain was a darling to the mass media. When it was learned that while he was a POW in Hanoi, and he was offered to be set free and he rejected the offer. The media portrayed it as a heroic gesture by McCain, thus, proving him a hero. Not really. The media neglected to tell their readers that the military code of conduct forbids him from accepting an offer that is not made to all the POW.

Hanoi said the release gesture was because John was the son of a high-ranking officer in the US Navy. This is contrary to all that the communist stand for. Communist are mean, hateful, evil people. They give up nothing out of good will. But we must not read too much into this. The point is that he was not a hero for denying the offer of being freed.

Here is an exception: Hanoi did make the offer to another POW. Before being released he was given the task of memorizing the names of every known POW. He at first refused, he did not want the disgrace of being released early. Upon his release the US Military nearly court marshaled him. He eventually convinced the military that his acceptance of the release was something all the other POWs wanted: It would help to ensure that they would be released at the end of the war.

Finally, there is proof that what most believed about McCain is true. He served his country while in the Navy. Just like millions of others. They were all heroes. McCain’s heroism stopped when he returned. His career and life since is filled with less than honorable occurrences from graduating 894th out of 899 in his academy class, constantly defying authority, breaking rules, and to many–many affairs (he readily admitted to this). One writer correctly listed him as, “the maverick, the former maverick, the curmudgeon, the bridge builder, the war hero bent on transcending the call of self-interest to serve a cause greater than himself, the sore loser, old bull, last lion, loose cannon, happy warrior, elder statesman, lion in winter.”

He was all over the place. One thing he wasn’t is conservative. He did not represent his state well. One final blow of lack of loyalty was when Sarah Palin was not invited to his funeral. McCain, no doubt, requested that before his demise.

Posted on

Why Guilty For Lying To FBI But Not For Crime Being Investigated?

When one is in the crosshairs of the FBI one doesn’t stand a chance.

All you need to know:
The FBI is not held accountable for their actions and has become a “loose cannon.” If they don’t like you, for any reason, they can terrorize you. The FBI in concert with the Democratic Party attempted a coup to overthrow President Trump’s election results.

Details: We see a lot of people being found guilty of lying to the FBI but not guilty of the crime being prosecuted. This phenomenon of placing one under investigation and then taking a plea deal for lying is all too common with the FBI; it often occurs when the FBI can’t prove the original charge. 

The reason for the success of this tactic is that the FBI does not record any interviews. When they ask the victim a question the only account of both the question and the answer is the written account of the agent. And no, the victim can not record the session either. Often, later in the investigation, the same question is asked, but this time in a different way and the victim will often answer differently. Why? Because the victim may perceive the subject of the question differently than from the first, and thus, answers the new question differently. Then FLASH, the agent produces the first account, in a 302 (the agent’s written report) and shows it to the victim: If offered a plea deal the victim must take it, after all, it is his/her verbal account against the agent’s written one and a lesser sentence versus one for years in prison.

There have been several court cases where a defendant is guilty of the actual crime being investigated, and yet. the judge tosses out the case because there is no recording of statements when the opportunity, by the FBI, was abundantly clear. In this tech-filled world, why would the FBI not record them? Recordings are required in other courts whenever possible; why not hold the FBI to the same standard of excellence that local law enforcement is? 

Yes, of course, the vast rank and file of the FBI are perfectly honorable. Really? How do we know? If they don’t follow commonly accepted practices (of ethics), the same ones that all other law enforcement agencies do, there’s nothing to compare them to. They should at least match the quality being achieved by our smallest police departments.

One infamous event: At the 1996 Olympics in Atlanta GA, Richard Jewel, who was working as a security officer, discovered a suspicious backpack. Thinking it might be a bomb he alerted authorities and he and fellow officers began trying to move the throngs of attendees out of the way. It was a bomb and it detonated before the clearing was finished. One person was killed and over a hundred were injured. Richard was heralded as a hero by all but the FBI. They thought it suspicious that an uneducated common man could be doing his job at that level of excellence. 

A very public investigation was started by the FBI. With the press present, Richard’s house was searched– twice. The FBI said that he matched a profile of a lone bomber who would plant a bomb just to find it and become a hero. Richard obtained a layer, who was an ex-FBI agent.

The FBI was so convinced of his guilt that they approached him, when his attorney was not present, and ask if he would be a part of a training exercise to be used to teach law enforcement personnel. He was flattered. They took Richard to a recording studio and gave him a script to read. In the script, Richard realized he was playing the part of the bomber, not the hero. He questioned this and hesitated. In his script, he was confessing to planting the Olympic bomb. Meanwhile, his attorney was trying to find him and he did find him just before Richard was about to be recorded. The recording was set up to sound as if it was obtained by a wiretap on Richard.  It had to be a wiretap because the FBI doesn’t record statementnts, unless it benefits them.

Eventually, the real bomber was caught and found guilty of this bombing plus three others at different locations. He was a civil terrorist.

Would the FBI send an innocent man to prison just so they could clear a very public crime? On a hunch? Yes, but only because they wrongly thought him guilty. Richard successfully sued three news outlets that went along with the FBI”s leaked lies. He was eventually acknowledged as a hero and was very popular. He went from certainly going to prison to a career in law enforcement.  It is very probable that the FBI agents were never punished, the FBI won’t tell.

The upper Escalon of this FBI, in concert with the Democratic Party, attempted nothing less than a silent coupe. Had Hillary won the presidency democracy, as a true democracy, would have died in the USA. We have had major security breaches and crimes committed by Democrats who are then given a pass while the tiniest tweet by President Trump is heavily investigated. There can be no argument to the fact that the FBI attempted to overthrow the Republican Party. When candidate Trump said to the press that his campaign was being wiretapped the main-stream media, and even myself, thought him over-dramatic. The media blasted him. Who would wiretap a US Presidential Candidate? After all, this isn’t Russia. 

What a shock to find out that our own FBI WAS wiretapping Trump. That they sent in a mole to try to entrap his campaign. The FBI and the media just couldn’t believe that they could fail in doing this, but they did. While Trump isn’t perfect he has proven himself to be much more honest than the deep-state Washington DC types. The FBI as it is today must be, in effect, overthrown. It requires someone in charge that will clean house. I personally I still have a wait and see position on that.

Liberals have openly claimed that they will overthrow the government. Huh? When did they say that? In the ’60s the communist supported radicals said they would slowly infiltrate the government, and our institutions of education, and overthrow it before the public caught on. The current FBI and Democratic Party are the proof it is working. Oh, and just one more tidbit; John Brennon, director of the CIA under Obama, was a card carrying communist. Before joining the CIA he wondered if his support and vote for the communist presidential candidate, in the election just before he applied to the CIA, would derail his security clearance by the CIA. It didn’t. It appears it enhanced his career, thus, we had a communist as the director of the CIA.