RashyNullPlanet

There is no significant difference between this…

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G_ZWTx-QUj4

…and this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ljYNgLnpxM

The only difference between those two videos is who pays the perpetrators.

In both videos the murderers are obviously dedicated to the task of killing.

In both videos the murderers have abandoned their responsibility to determine right from wrong and are simply following orders from distant others.

In both videos the murderers act without fear of interference from bystanders.

In the first video, the murderers are a mob of men brutalizing a woman who dared violate their ridiculous insane sense of ownership of all women.

In the second video, the murderers are a mob of men brutalizing a mentally handicapped man who dared violate their ridiculous insane sense of self-importance.

In both cases, the murderers have abandoned their consciences, and persist in their brutality despite the obvious murder they’re committing.

The only discernible difference is that the murderers in the first video were a mere mob, and the murderers in the second video were a gaggle of tax-financed cops in “the land of the free, and the home of the brave.”

All those murderers are the worst kind of sub-human zealots. They crave violence and sadism, and they seek someone, anyone, to make their violence and sadism appear legitimate, so they don’t have to think for themselves or answer for their murderous actions. The mob latched onto religion. The cops latched onto worship of law.

Again: Your job does not free you from your primary obligation to determine right from wrong and to act accordingly.

Three recent items, all excellent examples of that fact:

• Government-paid hell-raisers
• Thoreau on separating oneself from the state
• Judicial terrorists

See the binding principle?

Commenter Andrew at Radley’s place, notes, of cops:

They’ve pretty much dropped any pretense of being anything but bullies, thugs and an army of occupation.

Take a long look at that Denver PD commemorative t-shirt. That’s a mark of people who crave bullying, intimidation, control, and wielding arbitrary force. It’s telling that every cop involved in the DNC received one “free”, yet there is demand for 2000 more.

The pretense “to serve and protect” is long dead. The new premise of police conduct is this: their presumptive authority must be respected at all costs.

Sean Bell’s murderers were acquitted this afternoon:

Three detectives were acquitted of all charges Friday in the 50-shot killing of an unarmed groom-to-be on his wedding day

Officers Michael Oliver, 36, and Gescard Isnora, 29, stood trial for manslaughter while Officer Marc Cooper, 40, was charged with reckless endangerment. Two other shooters weren’t charged.

Cooperman indicated that the police officers’ version of events was more credible than the victims’ version. “The people have not proved beyond a reasonable doubt that each defendant was not justified” in firing, he said.

With tires screeching, glass breaking and bullets flying, the officers claimed that they believed they were the ones under fire.

The emphasis is mine. It should be obvious what happened: one cop fired a shot, the others heard it, panicked, assumed they were being fired upon, and joined the summary execution that killed Sean.

This is disgustingly predictable:

[Judge] Cooperman indicated that the police officers’ version of events was more credible than the victims’ version.

Deference to police, despite the evidence, has become a prerequisite to being a judge.

In the end, this is all we need to know:

There was no weapon inside Bell’s blood-splattered car.

Those cops fucked up huge. Cooperman lacks the spine to say so, and let the murderers walk away.

Sean Bell’s murder is one more reason that cops should be required to wear forehead cameras streaming live video and broadcasting GPS coordinates.

Charley Hardman’s post from a few weeks ago, that was nuremberg, this is now, gets at what I’ve been saying for a long time now, and what should be obvious to anyone with even the smallest shred of principle and integrity: your job does not free you from your obligation to determine right from wrong and to act accordingly.

The implications of that are immense, and apply to everyone, from Adolph Eichmann, to the local dog monitor girl.