this seems to be a good way for us to proceed, as, after all, everything we make illegal is never a problem again, if we're to believe what those in charge tell us;

we regularly see things like the following article displays in which bad cops make innocent lives a difficult thing;

Brooklyn, NY — Charges against the now-disgraced NYPD detective Joseph Franco are being welcomed by the families of dozens of New Yorkers as it is leading to the dismissal of their family members’ charges. Franco was reportedly caught framing innocent individuals and now Brooklyn District Attorney Eric Gonzalez’s Conviction Review Unit this week asked for the dismissal of 27 felony convictions and 63 misdemeanor convictions based on Franco’s corrupt policing.

According to ABC 7, Franco has been indicted in Manhattan for perjury, official misconduct and other charges in connection with four incidents whereby he allegedly framed numerous individuals for making narcotics transactions.

According to the Conviction Review Unit, the dozens of cases are being dismissed because Franco’s crimes have discredited his witness testimonies.

“Knowingly and repeatedly framing innocent people obliterates the credibility of any police officer and proving perjury in such circumstances is rare,” Gonzalez said. “After a grand jury reviewed the evidence and indicted former Detective Franco, I have lost confidence in his work. His cases in Brooklyn are over a decade old, which limited our ability to reinvestigate them, but I cannot in good faith stand by convictions that principally relied on his testimony. Integrity and credibility are at the heart of the justice system and prerequisites for community trust.”

After Gonzalez moved to dismiss cases under his office, Judge Matthew D’Emic moved to dismiss dozens of similar drug convictions tied to the corrupt cop. Brooklyn Criminal Court Judge Keisha Espinal followed suit vacating more than 50 drug convictions.

As ABC 7 reports: ..........read and watch more.......

 it seems that the adl, the militant joos, are upset that tucker carlson is saying something they don't like, which you can hear him speak at the link below;

The Anti-Defamation League’s CEO Jonathan Greenblatt condemned Tucker Carlson for defending “replacement theory” on his show Thursday and said that it’s time for the Fox News host to be taken off the network.

“Tucker must go,” Greenblatt wrote on Twitter. He also fired off a letter to Fox News Media CEO Suzanne Scott, in which he wrote that Carlson’s “full-on embrace of the white supremacist replacement theory on yesterday’s show and his repeated allusions to racist themes in past segments are a bridge too far.”

The white replacement theory is a conspiracy theory on the far right and among white nationalists that elites are plotting to replace whites with immigrants. {snip}

A Fox News spokesperson would not comment, but pointed out that Carlson said on his show that he was not describing white replacement theory and that it was a voting-rights question.

Carlson typically has responded to such a furor on his show. It’s also unlikely that the network would boot Carlson from its schedule. In March, it was the top show among cable news networks, with an average of 3.23 million viewers, and earlier this month he launched a new show for Fox Nation, Fox News’ subscription streaming service.

In the segment (watch it below), Carlson was speaking with Mark Steyn. “I know that the left and all the little gatekeepers on Twitter become literally hysterical if you use the term ‘replacement,’ if you suggest that the Democratic Party is trying to ‘replace’ the current electorate, the voters now casting ballots, with new people, more obedient voters from the Third World,” Carlson, said, “But they become hysterical because that’s what’s happening, actually. Let’s just say it: That’s true.”......watch tucker.........

 this is a very revealing exploration of free speech, academic freedom of inquiry and how that fares in the face of ideology;

Elisa Parrett, a newly tenured 38-year-old professor of English at Lake Washington Institute of Technology, the only public technical institute in Washington state, realized last June that she had some qualms about the approach her university—which is located in suburban Seattle and has about 6,000 students—had taken to diversity and inclusion.

Her concerns about the campus climate had been mounting for a while. “I wasn’t exactly open about my political positions at work, but I didn’t exactly keep them a secret either,” says Parrett, whose heterodox politics led her to vote for Green Party nominee Jill Stein in 2016 and for Donald Trump last year. “I simply avoided bringing politics up and avoided mentioning my views unless they seemed relevant to things other people had already said.” She didn’t like the rise of the concept of “safe spaces,” or certain aspects of what she calls “capital-A anti-racist pedagogy,” which she views as being distinct from mere opposition to racism.

But what most concerned her was an upcoming diversity training in which faculty and staff would be divided into white and nonwhite “caucuses.” In the wake of George Floyd’s death and the protests that then erupted all over the country, LWTech had, like so many other educational institutions, embarked on a large, highly visible attempt to make itself a more inclusive, less racist place. The session was a part of that. It was called Courageous Conversations, and it was scheduled for June 19.

The stated goal of such events is to allow people to talk about race and racism more openly, but the decision to have the races meet separately made Parrett uncomfortable. “Racial segregation of that kind seems like a throwback to the pre-1960s and not a good way to create any kind of cooperation or collaboration,” she says. She wasn’t the only one disturbed by the idea of a racially segregated anti-racism training. Her friend Phil Snider, another English professor at LWTech, said in an email to senior administrators that a “conference based on segregation by skin color does nothing to build a community of belonging.”.........read more.......

 

‘I have absolutely no doubt that we are in the presence of evil (not a determination I’ve ever made before in a 40-year research career) and dangerous products. It is entirely possible the COVID-19 vaccine will be used for massive-scale depopulation. Your government is lying to you in a way that could lead to your death.’

- Former Pfizer Vice President Dr. Mike Yeadon to AFLDS (America’s Frontline Doctors)

 "In this country, any sort of debate back and forth, any sort of incisive editorial comment in the major newspapers, is almost completely absent... And any member of Congress who's looking to be re-elected couldn't possibly say that they would take a balanced position between Israel and the Palestinians, it's very likely that they would not be re-elected," -- Jimmy Carter, 2006, 26 years after he's been out of the White House!

 caitlin speaks to you in this essay about some of the reasons we're in afghanistan and won't be leaving;

“Concerns mount that US withdrawal from Afghanistan could risk progress on women’s rights,” blares a new headline from CNN.

“Concerns are mounting from bipartisan US lawmakers and Afghan women’s rights activists that the hard-won gains for women and civil society in Afghanistan could be lost if the United States makes a precipitous withdrawal from the country,” CNN tells us.

What follows is yet another concern-trolling empire blog about why US troops need to stay in Afghanistan, joining recent others geared toward the same end like this CNN report about how the US military will open itself up to “costly litigation” if it withdraws now because it signed defense industry contracts into 2023, and this one by The New York Times about a US intelligence report urgently warning that a withdrawal from Afghanistan could lead to the nation being controlled by the people who live there............read and watch more....