The shooting of Daunte Wright can only be described as a sad tragedy. What should had been a simple traffic stop quickly escalated into a situation that would leave one man dead and an officer facing charges. What happened on the day Daunte was shot? Here’s what we currently know. On 04/11/2021, Wright was pulled...
Recent events have done nothing more than demonstrate the problem that has been ignored for many years. While many of us have known that this day would arrive, the vast majority sat in the comfort of their own homes, completely ignorant of what was about to come. Today, we’re going to review the rapid progression on the “war” against the American people. This is a war brought fourth by corporations and our very own government.
It should be obvious that the vast majority believe the election was rigged. While our platform has always been critical of Trump, we were even more critical of the idea of having “mail-in” votes. The concept of mailing in your vote simply left to many variables for things to go wrong. While I’m not willing to blatantly state that the election was rigged, I am willing to entertain the idea that it is very likely. Even with that aside, even with my criticism of Donald Trump, I believe, without doubt, that he is being completely railroaded by Nancy Pelosi and her “goons.”
In recent months, we saw the first impeachment process against Trump. Let’s face the reality about that process, it was a bogus situation with nothing less than ill intent. Of course, this wasn’t the last attempt to destroy the now former president. In recent weeks, in a highly controversial and potentially illegal move, we witnessed a second impeachment. This process was based on the grounds that Trump incited a riot at the capital. But did he? Well, the tweets that they are using say nothing about condoning a riot. In fact, the term didn’t even appear in the tweets; the fact is, we simply could not find any tweet to which President Trump encouraged a riot. But what about the riot itself?
Mainstream media has really bitten into this one. We know things were stolen from the capital. We know that people were killed during this riot. But what many people don’t know is how this group successfully bypassed heavily armed Security, law enforcement, and even Secret Service agents to get into this building. For that, you only have to search for videos, which are being spread all over the internet. What we see in these videos are the police opening barricades to allow the protestors in. Police are seen talking with the protestors, interacting with these “dangerous” thugs. What I’m saying here should be clear: they got in because the police literally opened the doors for them. Because of these videos, some people are lead to believe that this was actually a bait to justify impeachment.
The second impeachment is highly questionable, at best. While it would still have to go court, even with the votes already being cast, Trump will no longer be in office when this happens. This would make him the first President to ever be impeached after already being removed from his position. Of course, the second impeachment is also a first. Meanwhile, as a result of this, tensions are quickly reaching a boiling point. I no longer believe that the possibility of civil war, I now wonder when it will happen.
Further tension arose with the questionable removal of Trump from social media. While many people are surprised and shocked by this, they really shouldn’t be. For years, Facebook has taken a stance to shutdown independent media platforms, or anybody who spoke against their supported political figure; Twitter is known to do the same, though not as extreme as Facebook. The basic point is: they’ve been censoring people for years now, with no accountability, and it’s not going to stop just because of who the person is. For those who are absolutely outraged by this, questions regarding our constitutional rights arise. Can a company do this? Well, that’s tricky. Technically, they are private companies. However, as I’ve said many times before, a company who is on the stock market falls into the category of being “public domain.”
Rather or not they can do this doesn’t mean they won’t. As our own government continues to put the nails into the coffin of our democracy, at the expense of the American people, we can expect to see many more reactions. The capital riot is just the start of what could very well become an outright war. While the government has the ability to prevent this, I don’t believe they will. If anything, I believe this is exactly what they’ve been wanting to happen. After all, anybody who’s observant can see that this tension has been slowly boiling for many years now.
The Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement, since its founding, has held firm to the claim that it fights for equality, against police brutality, and various other issues that effect the black community. While tensions between the police and general public have been at an all time high, it has only enhanced the problem created by...
It goes without say that we should all be entitled to medical care. For some people, this form of care means life or death. However, in all the splendor joys that 2020 has already provided us, we are finding that, for many people, medical care is outright being denied. In fact, for specific groups of people, they aren’t even being allowed in the door before being asked to leave the facility. Why? It all boils down to the mask mandate. I understand that many people will disagree with this article. I also understand that I will most likely catch a lot of grief for writing it, however, I simply refuse to sit back and watch as specific groups of disabled people continue to be targeted, denied their basic right to medical. After all, we have already seen other rights be stripped away, we’ll get into that also.
First, and foremost, it is important to understand that the mask mandate is that: a mandate. Although many people will try to claim this to be law, it’s not. The difference in a mandate and law comes down to a variety of factors, how it came to be is among them. While state and federal laws get run through every government house known to man, the mandate had never undergone such a process. Basically, this makes it unenforceable by law enforcement, though they are attempting to enforce it anyway. The issue in them enforcing it can be chalked down into what the very definition of their occupation: to uphold and enforce the law.
Initially, the mask mandate was a suggestion. Never intended to be required, the government composed a list of “safety” procedures for people to follow, if they so wished. However, what we ended up seeing completely opposed this initial stance. In a progressively slow measure, this request grew into the mandate. Some of the “safety” guidelines are as follow:
- Stay at least six feet apart from one another. Apparently, we are facing the only known virus in history that has a travel distance of six feet.
- Wear a mask. This is something we are going to really get into shortly.
- Avoid large crowds. Goes back to the whole six feet portion.
Enforcement vs. your rights
In enforcing this potential violation to the constitution, as well as civil liberties, we have seen the outright measures our very own government are willing to take. In the past several months, we have seen churches forced into closing their doors and their ministers arrested upon refusing to do so. If you aren’t well versed in the Constitution yet, let’s just recap, shall we?
Under the first amendment, you have the right to free speech, the press, religion, and so on. In regards to religion, the amendment states, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” Hence where their idea of enforcement now becomes a problem.
By forcing religious institutions into closing their doors, they directly violated the first amendment. Regardless of the reason as to why this was done, it changes nothing in regards to the result. To take it further, those who refused to cease practicing within their religious institutions, were simply arrested. Never, in the history of the United States, has a minister been arrested for refusing to terminate their religious practices; of course, this is no longer a truthful statement.
Within the mask mandate, there are exemptions that must be noted. It is these exemptions that have lead to this article. The exemptions within themselves aren’t the problem, it’s how businesses treat individuals who are exempted that has become the problem.
- pre-existing respiratory conditions.
- sensory disorders, such as those associated with autism.
The above are only a few examples of things that are exempted. Regardless of this, corporations, and even medical facilities, are making blanket policies that force everybody, exempted or not, to wear these masks. Furthermore, for those who are exempted, there doesn’t appear to be any form of help with fighting these illegal policies. So, let’s go ahead and arm our disabled friends with a few pieces of legal information that may be of assistance.
The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) is quickly becoming a critical law to know. Within this law, there are protections that could translate into the enforcement of these corporate policies, as well as the mandate itself though the mandate has exemptions for this very reason. The two titles that we are going to specifically focus on are II and III of the ADA.
“Title II applies to State and local government entities, and, in subtitle A, protects qualified individuals with disabilities from discrimination on the basis of disability in services, programs, and activities provided by State and local government entities. Title II extends the prohibition on discrimination established by section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, 29 U.S.C. 794, to all activities of State and local governments regardless of whether these entities receive Federal financial assistance.”
Title III focuses on private businesses (also known as public accommodations). All new construction and modifications must be accessible to individuals with disabilities. For existing facilities, barriers to services must be removed if it is readily achievable. Public accommodations include facilities such hotels, restaurants, bars, theaters, grocery stores, hardware stores, dry-cleaners, banks, professional offices of health care providers, lawyers, and accountants, hospitals, private bus or train stations, museums, libraries, zoos, amusement parks, places of education, day care centers, senior citizen centers, homeless shelters, gymnasiums, health spas, bowling alleys, and golf courses to name a few.
To read this in its entirety, please visit this link.
Essentially, these titles prevent corporations, etc. from denying disabled individuals services solely on the grounds of their disabilities. For those who are being denied, as we’ve recently seen, this act will quickly become your best friend in fighting these unjust policies.
The mandate has been met with such controversy that lawsuits are currently ongoing. States such as Ohio, Wisconsin, and Texas are just a few states to mention. Rather or not you are for, or against the mandate, one thing must be clear: For the disabled individuals who cannot wear such devices, life has become a much more difficult challenge than what was ever needed. Rather it requires a revocation, overhaul, or even clarification of the mandate, to resolve the issues that are apparently present, it is, without a doubt, that action must be taken.
Recently, Rayshard Brooks was killed by Officer Rolfe. Since that time, charges have been filed against the him. As a result, two different distracts in Atlanta have had their officers walk. Several other police stations will most likely have to cover these districts which will be nearly impossible for them to do.
When you watch the video in its entirety, you’ll see that Officer Rolfe had arrived at the scene following a report that Rayshard was asleep at the wheel of his car in a Wendy’s parking lot. When he arrived, the car was parked. Rayshard was asked several questions, given a sobriety test, and was found to be under the influence. Several times he asked the Officer to drive him to his sisters house. Without reading him his Miranda Rights, Officer Rolfe started to handcuff Rayshard and said that he was being “taken in,” due to the fact he was intoxicated. Rayshard and Rolfe got into a scuffle and Rayshard took Rolfe’s taser, ran off, and then pointed it at him. Rolfe shot him.
According to the police, Officer Rolfe was following protocol because a weapon was involved and was aimed at him. Now, as to why he didn’t give Rayshard a ride to his sister’s house remains unanswered. A lot of questions are left unanswered. Which has led us to where we are now.
The Districts in Atlanta that no longer have Police Stations are going through what the police call “the Blue Flu.” This means that there’s a massive strike the police are showing in protest due to the fact that charges have been filed against Officer Rolfe.
Police have always operated under what’s known as “Blue Brotherhood.” There are other terms used such as “Blue Wall of Silence”, “Blue Code’, and “Blue Shield.” This all boils down to there a rule that police officers are to never report each other. This includes misconducts and any type of crime, including police brutality. So, when charges were officially filed against Officer Rolfe, the two districts in Atlanta where the police stations have been shut down in protest are following the Blue Brotherhood.
The city of Atlanta is under fire more than ever. The police versus the public is at an all time high, and there won’t be any winners by the end. Either Officer Rolfe is found innocent and then faces a very public backlash, or he’s found guilty which could lead to more Blue Flu’s in Atlanta.
What would have happened if Officer Rolfe had driven Rayshard to his sister’s house? What would have happened if Rayshard hadn’t taken Rolfe’s taser and pointed it at him? These are just two of many questions that will sadly, remain unanswered.
You can watch the video of the arrest linked below. Please know that the video is graphic. Credit to the YouTube Channel: 11Alive
Law enforcement has one fundamental job: uphold the law. While many questions have been raised regarding the officer not simply taking the man out, it does in fact, have a rather simplistic answer. Rashard was found in a parking lot, intoxicated, and passed out. Because he was behind the wheel, any officer would know that this man had clearly driven there drunk, placing himself, and the general public, in potential danger.
Once Rashard removed the officer’s weapon, he created an entirely new situation. While a taser is classified as “less than lethal,” for the officer it could mean death. If he had been shot with the weapon, it would had completely immobilized this cop. It would had given Rashard enough time to grab his service weapon, potentially murdering the cop. The debate regarding rather or not the officer was justified, comes down to this: yes. The officer followed protocol, protecting his life.
Famous journalist, Chris Hansen, has apparantly enraged many of the people who came to trust him. The famous journalist, known for targeting child predators, had allegedly sold the rights for his Onision investigation. While Hansen has claimed it to be a move to gain more attention, the online community is simply not buying it. In one instance, Hansen even blocked an individual who was critical of the act.
Although Hansen has had years of experience as a television journalist, he hasn’t been without financial problems. Rather it be millions worth of debt, an arrest, it seems that things haven’t been fairing well for the journalist. It is for this reason, many within the online community speculated that the Onision investigation was a money ploy.
Although Hansen brought a form of momentum to the Onision situation, he hadn’t actually stated any facts that weren’t already available. At one point, Hansen attempted to interview the infamous Youtuber only to be met with local police. Meanwhile, some within the online community speculated this to be a problicity stunt.
Behind the scenes of the investigation, there was a boiling pot of controversy. While much of it was focused on his former employee, Vincent Nicotra, Chris wasn’t spared. Nicotra was infamously known for filing false DMCA claims, doxxing, hate speech, and so fourth. While all of this had been made public, it would take months for Hansen to act. Upon removing Nicotra, things cooled down a bit, but that wouldn’t last.
During the investigation, Hansen made claims that the FBI were investigating. However, when probed, he appeared to be evasive only stating that, “these things take time.” For a community who already felt betrayed, for many reasons, this wasn’t flying very well. The controversy didn’t end on that note, however.
Hansen selling the Onision story seems to have boiled the pot dry. Questions regarding the victims, who entrusted him with their stories, has become a common concern. It also raises questions into Hansen’s current investigation on “Dahvie Vanity.” In this aspect, people can’t help but wonder rather or not Chris will sell this story also.
While selling a story, even if it brings controversy, is common, blocking those who are critical is questionable at best. As a journalist, we are constantly under a microscope, people awaiting for us to slip just so they can berate us. However, doing a move that creates controversy and then blocking those who question it, leads me to question Hansen’s journalistic integrity.
With national protests occuring on a daily basis, it’s not to farfetched that some rather interesting stories would arise. Today, in Milwaukee, we stumbled upon one of these stories. A cardiovascular physician assistant, identified as Emily Novicki, was accused of runing over several “peaceful protestors.” In her tweet, a woman going by “Alexis.” Says:
Today in Milwaukee! This woman hit 2 peaceful protestors, injuring them and came within 2 feet of hitting a child. This was as they peacefully marched. She drove into the crowd. Police were shown multiple videos & she was still let go. TWITTER LETS MAKE SURE SHE LOSES HER JOB. 🥳
However, the events, as explained by the BLM protestor, is not what actually took place. As I began searching through evidence, I found a slightly different story. I attempted to reach out to Emily only to find her Facebook had been deleted, more on that shortly. Based upon the evidence, which included a video, the alleged peaceful protestors had surrounded the young woman’s car. At this point they jad begun chanting, even tapping her car with a sign. It is alleged that this is when Emily ran through them. But was she in the right for doing so?
We have already seen, in recent weeks, what happens when protestors encircle a vehicle. Recently, a Fed-Ex driver was forced to flee in his semi as they attempted to vandalize his equipment; this is just one example, of course. It isn’t to hard to believe that this woman would had been in fear for, not only her safety, but her life.
Following this event, Emily had apparantly deleted her Facebook. From what I was able to obtain, one of the protestors began sharing her workplace information, and her social media account, on Twitter. In doing this, she opened the young medical professional to harassment, threats, and so fourth. It is presumed that this is what lead to her deleting the account.
A peaceful protest is exactly as it claims to be: peaceful. Blocking somebody from leaving the area is not a peaceful demonstration, that is an act of aggression. While I would never condone using a car for a weapon, I can understand how terrorizing a situation like this must be.
While a false narrative spreads around on Twitter, I choose to present my findings, without bias. The situation comes down to this: had the protestors not surrounded her car, hit it with a sign, in what can be viewed as a clear act of intimidation, nobody would had been injured. The false narrative, placing complete blame on the woman, who appears to had been a victim, is absolutely ridiculous.
Protest safetly, protest smartfully.
Skai Jackson is an 18-year-old actress and is best known for her work on the Disney Channel. Recently, Skai has been using her platform to expose racists, some of them being teens. This has garnered so much attention (both positive and negative) that Rowan University in New Jersey said that they would look into their students who post racist behavior online.
Recently, Skai recieved a twelve hour ban from Twitter due to reports claiming that she was harassing and doxxing teens. While Skai does give out screenshots on social media, as well as clips, of what they’ve said on TikTok, she has stated that she will never give out a person’s adddress. On June 5th she tweeted,
“Also, please don’t send me anyone’s address. I won’t be posting that.. these people have said horrible things but posting someone’s full address is going a little too far. Let’s hope they all live and learn from this situation and educate themselves.”
Some people have also given her the incorrect usernames in regards to outing racists. Skai addressed this on June 6th saying, “If you are sending me someone’s username PLEASE be sure you have it 100% correct. It’s not cool to blame someone for something they didn’t do.”
When it comes to outing racists, Skai made this statement on Instagram regarding why she’s begun doing so:
“During this sensitive time, I’ve seen some horrific statements and social media videos made by Caucasian teens/young adults. Let me say this: If I see you post it, I WILL expose you!! If you think you’re big and bad enough to say it, I will most definitely put your own words on blast!! Don’t reach out to my team of bullying and causing you pain! How do you think your words affect my people?! Your privilege won’t get you out of this one. So no!! I will not take it down! Next time, think about what you say! I will never condone racist remarks/ quotes/slander. You’re the real bullies! You’re victimizers, not the victims! Go boo hoo somewhere else!” #BlackLivesMatter
As someone who uses many social media platforms, including TikTok, I have personally noticed a horrible problem with racists on the platform, and so have many others. Yesterday, I made a video to raise awareness about a teen from Georgia, who had a suspicious death, named Kendrick Johnson. Not only have I been shocked at some of the comments denying that this never happened (I always tell them that this is real), but one person actually wrote, “Good. One less black.” I was about to report him, but TikTok had already removed both his comment and his account.
Also, Skai isn’t the only one doing this. Other people have posted videos from TikTok outing teens and their racist comments. But, there are people who have taken it too far. Again, this hasn’t happened only when it comes to Skai. People have been doxxing racist teens before Skai started doing this.
From what I’ve gathered, Skai is reposting what teens and young adults have willfully put online. I haven’t seen her give out anything but usernames. Which again, she addressed the problem of being sent the wrong username. It’s not doxxing if you yourself put the content out there.
So, while Skai hasn’t been the only one doing this, other people have been doing it for awhile. Skai is very well known, so with that, comes both more positive and negative attention. She has many people backing and defending her. There’s also several others who have accused her of being a “cyberbully” stating that she shouldn’t be targeting teens.
The issue I keep coming back to is that people have been doing this before her and no one batted an eye. But now that a celebrity is doing it, suddenly it’s a whole different ballgame. Could that be because even more eyes are on the teens and young adults who make these racist comments and thus get more attention for their hate speech, which unfortunately, leads to potential doxxing?
Should all the negative attention be put on Skai instead of everyone who has been doing this, or should we learn to face the reality that there are a lot more people than we realized who are openly racist and that it’s a lot more common, and tolerated, than we realized?
I also used some of Skai’s own Twitter account for quotes and information Please don;t send her hate.
As with any social media site, Twitter has a vast culture of thoughts, opinions, drama, and even the occasional racism. When things, such as racism, occur, it’s generally a matter of time before the flood gates open, unleashing a berage of hate toward the individual.
In a series of racially targeted speech, Twitter user, “tauralovesallpeople,” made a vast series of hateful tweets. The targets of her content, the black community, witnessed everything from a photo of the user in “black-face,” posts discussing how George Floyd deserved to die, and much more. While the black-face image was removed, she ultimately reposted it saying, “Got deleted, so I’m posting again. IT WAS A NOKE N***** RELAX.” Naturally, this created outrage.
So what is black-face? Black-face is the act of making your face look as though it has black skin. This act goes back decades and was commonly used as a method lf mocking, degrading, and insulting the black community.
Upon posting the image, for the second time, it is presumed that Twitter took a final stance on the situation. Upon looking for her two accounts, I quickly discovered that they had been terminated. This was most likely done as a result of violating their “terms of service.” Does it end here? Possibly not.
While Twitter has apparantly deleted her accounts, the young lady behind the posts could see herself in litigations. While something like this is generally civil, it is possible for the state to file criminal charges, all it takes is for somebody to file them. Furthermore, as we have seen with certain public officials, it’s also something that could return to haunt her later in life. In this situation, deleting her account was the best response. However, that doesn’t prevent her from creating another one at a later date.