Cyber, Free Article, internet safety, Law Enforcement, Media, Opinions, police relations, predatory, terrorism, Uncategorized

Another Facebook purge?

This article is very different from anything we’ve written in the past. While our normal policy is to not write anything to which we are directly related, we have been forced to make an exception. Over the past month, I have uploaded three YouTube videos. The videos not only explain the apparent attack on the “War on Corruption” platform, it goes to detail the progressive censorship of my own account. Though I had hoped for a resolution, Facebook has adamantly refused to address any message I’ve sent to them. In fact, they’ve only increased the various forms of censorship to my account and my platform.

Censorship: Phase I

In the beginning, what Facebook had done was nothing more than a slight annoyance. With no explanation, not even a noted policy violation, I had found that my account had been blocked from commenting or replying to political pages. This means that I could not interact with any political figure, this immediately caught my attention. At this point and time, I was still able to comment, reply, and even post to other pages, groups, etc. At this time, I was oblivious to just how far Facebook would take this censorship.

Censorship: Phase II

After about a week of dealing with the original block, Facebook apparently decided that it was time to do additional blocks. Upon trying to post a comment to a group, which I had been able to do the previous day, I found that I had been restricted from doing so. As with the original block, no reason was given explaining why my account had been restricted. The censorship wouldn’t end here. If it did, this article wouldn’t exist. Within twenty-four hours of this new restriction, I was restricted from commenting and replying to all pages and groups. However, at this point and time, I was still able to post on the “WoC” page, though commenting and replying had now been restricted.

Censorship: Phase III

For the next few weeks, I progressively became agitated over the restriction. On top of running this media platform, I compose and sell music online. At this point and time, this had remained untouched by the nefarious goons of Facebook. However, War on Corruption had now been completely restricted from me. I could no longer post, comment, reply, or even send private messages from the platform’s page. It was, at this point that we decided to begin the process of removing WoC from Facebook completely. During this period, Facebook added yet another new restriction. Not only was I unable to post, comment, reply, or send PM’s, I now could no longer join or leave groups. Worst yet, Facebook wasn’t even finished playing this illegal form of censorship.

Censorship: Phase IV

With this, we are now up to date with the current situation. At this point, Facebook has removed my ability to post, comment, and reply from my personal profile. Furthermore, the page I have, to which I promote my side gig of music, has also been slammed by the social media giant. This means that, on two different platforms, Facebook has not only censored me, but they’ve even cut a form of my income: music. But it doesn’t end there. Out of our team of seven, five of us have been targeted in this exact same manner, all without reason or explanation. Though all of us have tried to appeal it, the results are the same. The appeal process itself has been restricted from all of us.

This means that while we have the option to appeal, should we attempt to do so it will fail to go through; Facebook will never even know that we’ve tried to fight it. As of now, our platform is being operated by two individuals of our team, the only two who have not been targeted with this illegal act. Meanwhile, I continue my search for a civil rights attorney. Not only for our team, but for the various other platforms, and individuals, targeted by Facebook.

Conclusion

With much discussion, we do have a lead into what instigated the censorship: I was critical of a specific political figure, one that Facebook supports. With their censorship, they’ve not only shown how far they will go to stop anybody who opposes their political views, they have demonstrated how far they will go to silence any journalist who speaks against those to which they support.

We aren’t writing this article to bring awareness to what is happening to our platform, we are writing this to warn other journalists, and truth seekers, of what Facebook is willing to do to silence them. We have full expectation that Facebook will shut us down. Since the time of the initial restriction, we have watched as our platform stats spiraled into oblivion. With this, we have absolutely no doubt that, much like our team, our platform is being shadow banned by the site.

During what many call the “purge,” Facebook wiped out over a dozen media platforms from their site. Among them: “Freedom Though Project,” who had well over a million followers. The habitual pattern of Facebook is to target independent media, why not? They can’t buy us off unlike the corporate giants of the media world. While Facebook continues to hold its position of being a “private” company, this is factually untrue. Facebook had ceased being a private company when they entered the public domain, the Stock Market. While this has many financial benefits for the site, it has a lot of legal disadvantages. Among them, violating constitutional rights.

Though we have no expectation of the platform surviving this, on Facebook at least, we have begun moving to other sites. Below, are links to our new locations. We hope to see you there just as we hope that Facebook will cease this unjust activity.

Business relations, Free Article, Law Enforcement, Media, Opinions, Police, police relations, predatory

Evading accountability: The report

In law enforcement, report writing is essential. Not only does it provide information involving various situations, it also works as a legal document, which can be used within the court system. On the dark side of things, this simple report can actually work in getting an officer out of trouble. Though it sounds farfetched, it’s not. Today, I am going to reveal to everybody how that can work. This isn’t coming from researched information. instead, this is coming from first hand information resulting from my time working within the system.

When writing a report, especially in instances to which use of force is used, the way the report is written can help or hurt that officer. This fact is so important that departments devote an entire training course on how reports are to be written. Included within that training is how to avoid having that report come back on the officer. The best way to explain this is to simply provide you a scenario.

In this example, we have a victim who has been body slammed by an officer. The victim was compliant and unarmed. Now, if the officer was being honest, the report would read something like this:

On (date) I intercepted (Victim’s name,) regarding complaints of (situation.) The individual was complying to orders when officer (name) proceeded to use less than lethal force. In this force, the individual was slammed to the ground, at which time they were cuffed.

Now, the way the above report is written, will vary depending on the officer. However, this version of events isn’t what people generally see. As you can imagine, the above would place fault for any injuries onto the department, as well as the officer. This is why the police are trained on how to word their reports. For this reason, you will never see the above report. However, what you will see is this:

On (date) I intercepted (Victim’s name,) regarding complaints of (situation.) The individual wasn’t complying to orders. at this point, officer (name) proceeded to assist (name) to the ground and cuffed.

Notice the wording. In a report, rather than stating that the individual was “body-slammed,” the police will simply state that they “assisted” a person to the ground. This may not sound like a big deal but in the courts, that could mean the difference between doing your job and being charged with assault. Should the victim sue the department, this report would again be used to protect the officers involved.

This tactic is used in virtually every encounter that involves police. It doesn’t just include them, however. Every division of law enforcement, including the correctional system, utilize this method of report writing. In situations where an officer does make a report implicating abuse from other officers, another system of misinformation is utilized. The “Blue Brotherhood,” which we will be writing about in the near future, cannot be violated without consequence. An officer who writes a report, placing fault on a department or another officer, is faced with two separate situations.

To begin with, the officer will not be able to submit their report. When attempting to do so, the department will simply refuse to accept it until they modify it. Once the report has been altered, using the “appropriate” words, it can then be submitted. However, this doesn’t change the fact that this officer had violated the blue code. From this point forward, they face a real possibility of being targeted by not only other officers, but by those in charge.

The departments are about covering themselves, even if that means covering up their tracks. Because investigations are conducted by “internal affairs,” the methods used for writing these reports are never questioned. As a result, there is no accountability. Furthermore, officers who generally violate policy, or even the law, face no consequences for doing so. For this, and many other reasons, the way to which these reports are written do matter. As I said, it can come back to haunt the officer if done incorrectly.

Basic Level, children, Gold Membership, Law Enforcement, Media, Opinions, Police, police relations, predatory, shooting, terrorism

Shoot first, ask later: Linden Cameron shooting review

You have most likely heard of the Linden Cameron situation. Cameron is a 13-yo child, living in Salt Lake City, UT., who was, back in September, shot by “highly” trained officers. This is an article that we had been sitting on for sometime now. While we enjoy critiquing law enforcement, we had decided that it...

This content is for Basic and Gold Status members only.
Login Join Now

Free Article, Law Enforcement, Media, Opinions, Police, police relations, predatory

The police mentality

We continue our journey into exposing the legal system and its various forms of corruption. So far, we have exposed an incompetent police department and its chief, how law enforcement evades accountability with report writing, and how being innocent of a crime still means guilt. With these things being exposed, it is now time that we expose the mentality of the police. If you believe this mentality is disturbing in public, behind the scenes will be even more shocking. While our platform, and specific members of our team, have been targeted because of these articles, it only furthers our reasons for writing them in the first place. In this article we are not only going to be talking about law enforcement but also revisiting the Department of Corrections.

Bully Pride

This is the most recorded aspect of law enforcement, next to what appears to be the random shooting of civilians. We see it all the time, a power tripping cop going on a warpath. We have also seen how these events generally end. However, while this is what when they interact with the public, we don’t see what happens behind closed doors.

You wouldn’t think that other officers would be a target of such behavior; you would be wrong. Law enforcement, though they deny it, has what is called the “Blue Brotherhood.” Granted, this sounds like something from a mafia movie, but there is a good reason for that. In law enforcement, there are two types of officers: those who are “in” the brotherhood and those who aren’t. When it comes to this, you don’t want to be that guy who isn’t in it. Officers who find themselves in the “out,” find that their jobs become extremely difficult. They find themselves targets of other officers, supervisors, and even those within upper management. Basically, those who are not in the brotherhood, or violate it’s “code,” have no means of help from within the agency.

This mentality doesn’t just apply to the police, it also applies to the Department of Corrections, a harsh reality that was verified by our lead journalist, who once worked for this very system. Officers who are targeted find themselves alone and isolated within the very place they work. Harassment and bullying becomes extreme, until they finally give in and simply resign. Among the things that may happen to a targeted officer include: pay being withheld, false internal investigations from superiors, fabricated write-ups, and the list goes on. The ultimate goal is to push the officer into resigning. Though it would be easier to terminate that officer, termination means they could file unemployment while resigning makes that nearly impossible. Even if the officer resigns, the harassment doesn’t end there.

Once the officer resigns, they are immediately “blacklisted.” Blacklisting, to put it into simple terms, is a malicious method of ensuring that the former officer cannot obtain another law enforcement job. They are often put into a computer system, marked with “do not hire.” Should another agency contact the former place of employment, all they have to say is that he/she is not hirable, the blue brotherhood does the rest.

Bullying isn’t just subjected to the few good officers we have in this country. Inmates, who find themselves living within the prison systems, also become targets. While these individuals are in the prisons for a reason, it does not condone how they are treated by the officers working the facility. Within the Department of Corrections, there is a universal mentality: “we will take the word of an officer over an inmate.” This mentality immediately puts the inmate at a complete disadvantage. If the inmate is being targeted by an officer, files a complaint to which that officer denies the accusation, it becomes a case closed situation. No further investigation, nothing more is done.

Behind the scenes, officers have been known to joke, laugh, and even mock inmates, or those arrested. In one situation, our lead journalist had witnessed a conversation to which an officer laughed about body slamming a woman to the ground. Though the woman had to be taken to a medical ward for her injuries, that apparently only made the situation funnier for this officer. What’s worst about this? To this day, that officer remains employed with D.O.C.

Complete control

If you’ve ever looked at a Facebook profile belonging to an officer, you may notice how bland it is. There generally is a serious lack of information. Furthermore, they are cautious as to what they post. There is a reason for this. It’s not because the officer is in fear, though the department uses a fear tactic against them. The reason for this is because of the amount of control the departments have within the personal lives of its officers. All law enforcement agencies, including D.O.C. have policies that tell the officer what is allowed to be posted, what is forbidden, and what can get them fired. For instance, if the officer slams another department, or their own, that is grounds for punishment. Not only will the department force that officer, generally under duress, to remove the post, they could face further consequences. Demotion, pay withheld, write-ups are just a few examples of what that officer could face.

Law enforcement agencies control the behaviors of their officers with fear, intimidation, and various threats. On the flip side to this, officers within D.O.C do the same to the inmates, who are unlucky enough to find themselves within their facilities. On both ends of this spectrum, retaliation is a very real possibility. Those who dare to speak out, rather it be an officer or an inmate, often find themselves being made examples of. For the officers, the consequences could mean the loss of pay, targeted harassment from other officers, termination (or the threat of it,) and so fourth. For inmates, it’s almost the same aside the termination. For them, the possibility of being thrown into a segregation (SHU, Isolation, “The hole,” etc.,) is more than enough motive to keep them silent and obedient. While we often criticize every officer who works within these departments, most people are completely oblivious to what the “good cops” have to endure. We often wonder why they remain silent, why they rarely take action, and why they do nothing to make change. Unfortunately, this is the reason behind that.

Uncategorized

A chat with an officer (Photo gallery)

You may recall our previous article, Police department exposed. Since the time of this article, the department’s chief made contact with one of the WoC team, who had questions regarding their policies. In these photos, you will see how this law enforcement “professional” acts toward our team. She goes as far as to accusing him of being a completely different individual, citing that she “checked” into him. Though she is never clear on what this means, we have a pretty solid theory that she utilized her powers, as a law enforcement officer, to conduct some sort of background on the man. Of course, this is only a theory as she refused to explain what she meant. What we found to be disturbing is the amount of hostility received.

When reading the responses, our team couldn’t help but be stunned at her aggression. What started out as a simple question, regarding how a man was denied a job, turned into accusations, hostility, and a complete disregard of professionalism. In essence, her behavior only served to prove the previous article we wrote on the department and it’s past.

Upon saying “Have a good life,” I decided it was best to not push the subject any further. It had become abundantly clear that this officer was anything but professional, a simple question quickly escalated into an outright verbal altercation. While the individual I was asking about had no comment himself, those related to him did. It was those people who initially brought this to our attention. Though it could be seen as a small ordeal, it really lead us to question the concept of “innocence” within the legal system. In the end, it was that concept that lead us to even look into it.

Even with her “check,” it’s already been established that this department fails in many ways. Their idea of a background check is going to a site, “ODCR” and simply looking at court documents, and doing a poor job of that. They utilize a few “public information” sites beyond this. However, this is not a proper background investigation. If anything, it shows that this department is incapable of performing its duties.

To tell any member of our team that she had “looked” into us, is laughable, given the above reason. However, if she did than what she just confessed to is not only a violation of privacy laws, it’s outright illegal. The police can’t just look into people simply for questioning them or their department. However, she admits to doing that very thing. What’s worst about the fact she did this? She’s the one trained to do this sort of thing and she couldn’t even get the facts right when making her accusation. This, alongside her mannerisms, really leads me to ask, “does this department have anybody competent working at it?” So far, that’s unknown.

Above are a couple of reviews left about the department.

Business relations, Free Article, internet safety, Law Enforcement, Media, Opinions

Journalism vs. Facebook

1 Comment

At this point, I’m not even going to pretend to be surprised that this article would eventually come. In fact, I doubt that anybody who reads it would be. Facebook is a company that has a notorious history of censoring people. Rather it be for political reasons, what they classify as “spam,” or simply cleaning house of freelance journalists, Facebook has long since established its guilt. However, for the company, this guilt has not come without a price. With multiple lawsuits, one would think the company would make a few policy changes. This has not been the case. If anything, Facebook appears to be tightening the reigns on the very policies that have gotten them sued in the first place.

On my personal profile, I have multiple freelance journalists. You maybe wondering what we all have in common, why I would even mention them. The one common ground we all share is that all of our accounts have been, in some way, censored by Facebook. Furthermore, when conducting this censorship, we are given no explanation as to why.

Though Facebook has restricted my account, notice that they do not give an actual reason as to why.

On 10/20/2020, the journalist/founder of the platform “Discuss Global,” received a message like the one photographed above. in less than twenty four hours, I also received a message indicating that my account had been “restricted.” According to Facebook’s message, I had violated a policy. However, as you can see above, there is no example of what policy was violated, nor is there a copy of the violating post/comment. For those who have been on the platform for awhile, may recall the “journalistic purge.” This purge was the mass removal of dozens of independent journalistic platforms. Among these, “Cop Block” “The Daily Haze,” and “The free thought project.” It is almost as though Facebook is attempting to take down any journalist who is critical of Trump, something that I have in common with the other targeted journalists on my “friends” list.

Though I am given the option to appeal, doing so only brings up this error. This same event occurred when other journalists attempted to appeal.

While Facebook has given us the ability to appeal this “violation,” you can see for yourself what that appeal process brings. While Facebook continues to violate the rights of independent journalists, who don’t share their political views, earlier this year, the social media giant lost a class action lawsuit. you can read here for more information into that.

It’s commonly stated that Facebook is the perfect example of how socialism works. If you speak out against anything they support, they silence you. Perhaps, with all the lawsuits, Facebook should consider looking into their own policies and how they’re enforced before violating the rights of anybody who speaks out against their political agendas. Although this can be prevented, it would require that people take a stance against the platform.

Business relations, Free Article, internet safety, Law Enforcement, Media, Opinions, Police, police relations, predatory

Police department exposed

update

The Chief of police reached out to us, though she didn’t exactly answer our question. Below is that correspondence.

Chief: What are your questions about our policies?

WoC: Our platform was recently informed that your department rejected a potential application, partly on the grounds of an accusation to which an individual was found innocent. We know this because we were able to pull up this disposition. Though the individual involved has declined to comment on this, I thought I would touch base with you guys and find out how that was able to be used against this person, regardless of this disposition?

Chief: The individual you are talking about KNOWS why he was turned down. You have to tell the truth. I will be glad to talk to you I person. I will be in the office Monday.

At this point, the conversation was abruptly ended, she has not responded since this message.

—————————————

It was inevitable that this article would be written. In our current trend of exposing the “justice” system for all the glamorous corruption, it shouldn’t be to hard to conceive that we would begin targeting specific law enforcement agencies. Today, we are going after a small Oklahoma town, Earlsboro Police Department. This department was brought to our attention by a former applicant, denied a job on the basis of a charge, to which they were determined innocent. Upon conducting my own research into this department, it’s not all that surprising that they would had denied the individual’s application upon those grounds. After all, in 2018, the department was so corrupt it had gained state wide attention. Let’s review the Earlsboro Police Department.

History of abuse and corruption

As we have stated, this small town department is riddled with a past of corruption. In 2015, officer Michael Young, who is believed to still be with the department, targeted a freelance journalist. The journalist, associated with the organization “Cop Block,” had been filming the officer’s interaction with another citizen. To see that video, just click this link. The situation, based upon the video, is rather disturbing.

It shows officer Young parked in front of a residence, lights enabled. Upon leaving, he does a U-turn. When getting to the corner, where the journalist is located, he stops at the stop sign. However, he doesn’t simply drive away. Instead, Young sits at this sign, blocking potential traffic. This goes on for several minutes. Finally, after blocking the road for several minutes, officer Young decides to engage the journalist. The fact that the officer chose to even engage somebody, filming on a public road, is already questionable. But as we’ve said, this department doesn’t exactly operate with the legal scope.

More controversy hit the department in 2018. The former chief of police, Troy Magers found himself the centerfold of this event. Though this controversy was aimed at the private life of Magers, it spoke loudly for his character. So, we are going to give a quick rundown of the situation.

The former chief had rented a house. Upon leaving the residence, the home owner found it to be a complete wreck. Trash, feces, urine, roaches littered the home, it looked as if a hoarder had been living there. Though there is much debate as to why he was removed, one allegation is it was over sexual harassment claims and abuse of power. Though we haven’t been able to confirm the reasons leading up to his removal, we did find that he has an extensive history of misdemeanors and civil litigations dating back to the 1990’s. This leads us to our current question: If the EPD allowed this man to apart of the department, why did their current Chief of Police, Candie, deny a man who was found to be innocent of his charge?

Allegations against the former Chief of police didn’t just stop at how he destroyed a rental home. We were able to make contact with a man who had lived in the town during this time. According to this contact, the former chief had made a point of targeting a young woman and her children. In fact, the harassment had become so severe that she had allegedly bought a gun to protect her family from the police. Ultimately, after the officer attempted to remove her children, she and her family, was forced to move from their home.

We reached out to the department, in attempt to get answers. However, what we found was that any comment we left was hastily removed. To ensure our question was seen, and hopefully answered, we left it for them on a Google review (pictured below.) One thing we noticed when looking at their reviews, was their rating. 2.6 out of 5. While it’s not uncommon to see lower scores with any law enforcement agency, this is still remarkably low. Reviews accuse officers of theft to inaction in a potential life threatening situation.

Because they continue to delete any questions asked by the WoC team, we made our questions in a very public way. Doing it like this also ensures that the department cannot delete it.

The record showing the background of the EPD former police Chief, Troy Magers.

We find it interesting that a man with such a record of misdemeanors and civil suits was qualified to be a chief, but a man who was innocent wasn’t qualified to join the department. While the department has allegedly pulled the “legalities” card, when we review the history of their previous chief, that is something we find to be rather suspicious. While the department has now become more active within its local community, it doesn’t necessarily excuse it from its past. When policies are being created on the spot, when officers, who still remain with the department, hold a history of abuse and intimidation, we have more than enough reason to believe that nothing has truly changed.

It is unfathomable to believe that such a small department could be more corrupt than those in bigger cities. While we don’t believe the corruption has stopped, simply changed hands, it does appear that the department has made some drastic changes. While we still can’t confirm officer Young’s employment with this specific agency, we are told by a source that he maybe working for another department. Allegedly the entire department was wiped clean, alongside Chief Magers. According to sources, this was brought about from accusations of “sexual misconduct.” However, neither the city of Earlsboro, nor it’s police department, will confirm this. One thing that is clear is they are still enforcing a non-existent law. There is no law barring a person employment purely based upon an accusation. After all, accusations happen all the time, it’s the establishment of guilt that matters. Because our journalist does live within the same state as this department, they can rest assure that we are going to be watching them very closely in the days to come.

Business relations, Free Article, Law Enforcement, Media, Opinions, Police, police relations, predatory

Always guilty

“The system is broken.” At some point you have probably heard this expression. What if I were to tell you that this statement is wrong? The very system that you believe to be broken, in fact, was maliciously designed so that no matter what, you pay for the crime. If it sounds completely insane, it’s not. For many people, wrongfully strung into the court system, this is the reality that they face, regardless of disposition.

For those who haven’t been through this auction for your freedom, the idea you have is probably along these lines: you are charged, you go to court. If you are found guilty, you do your time, and you’re free. Alternatively, you are found innocent and that’s simply the end of it. Well, that’s not entirely true, just ask any innocent person who has been charged with a crime. Regardless of the fact that they were found “innocent” of the charge, the reality for them is this: they still pay for that crime.

What many of these people harshly learn is that companies, government agencies, and so fourth, still hold that charge against them. Is this legal? Not really, but they still do it. For these individuals, the concept of “innocent” simply does not exist. The embarrassment of being dragged into a courtroom, the loss of income, and people knowing what you were accused of but not accepting the disposition makes the words, “innocent until proven guilty” a lost luxury.

However, there is a way to obtain that luxury again, at least that’s the glimmer of light. The downside to it is in that it is going to cost you hundreds of dollars to do so. So, let’s break this court system down. For this breakdown, I’m going to presume innocence. You are charged with a crime. You are dragged to a courtroom for months, or even years on end. Finally, you get the verdict “innocent.” You think the humiliation is over, it’s not. Now, you have this charge on your background, still very publicly visible to those who look.

While it should be the responsibility of the court to remove this, when you were found innocent, they won’t. You have to spend money to bribe these political parasites into doing that. Without the bribe, your life spins into chaos. Every job you apply for, sees this charge. Although they see the disposition of that charge, it generally doesn’t matter. You’re denied jobs regardless. Meanwhile, these law enforcement agencies, judges, and various other parasitic leeches are banking off of this flawed system, all of it at your expense.

Once you pay the bribe, you get the expungement. However, that could take months to go through; it could also mean more court dates. The worst aspect to all of this is in the fact that the damage has already been done. While you’re left to deal with the broken pieces of your life, the cash cow within the (in)justice system continues it’s illusion that it is “for the people” rather than against them.

children, CPS, Free Article, hacking/doxxing, internet safety, Law Enforcement, Media, Police, predatory

Texas mother accused of rape

34-year old, Brittany Rouleau, is sitting behind bars tonight. While it is the job of a parent to protect their children, she is accused of raping her 12-year old son in 2018. The Wichita Falls resident allegedly shared a bed with the child at the time the crime was committed. According to the victim, she began questioning the now eighth grader about masturbation as she undressed.

At some point, during the already uncomfortable conversation, she instructed the boy to do the same. It was, at this point, that forced herself onto the child. Afterward, she instructed the boy to clean himself and to tell nobody of what just transpired. She further informed the child that he could also get into trouble since he “accepted” it. It would take two years before he finally revealed what had happened. Upon telling another adult, he was immediately brought to police.

Shortly after his confession, Brittany was arrested. Though she initially denied the accusation, she later confessed to the act. According to reports, she had even confessed the act to a neighbor. Though she’s currently a resident of the county jail, no court date has been assigned at the time of this article.

children, Gold Membership, Law Enforcement, Media, Police, police relations, shooting, Uncategorized

Shawnee apartment complex drive-by.

We would like to believe that the safest place to be is at our home. However, those living at an apartment complex in Shawnee, OK., learned just how quickly that safety can be violated. While this is just a preliminary article, using statements from various witnesses, we are going to post what our platform currently...